South Dakota Health Care Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460272951
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sioux Falls, SD, USA
Phone
6053392071
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,383,624
Expenses
$1,245,833
Assets
$2,585,948
Liabilities
$225,799

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PHILLIP SAMUELSON (PRESIDENT)
  • JASON HANSSEN (PRESIDENT EL)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK DEAK (EXECUTIVE DI): $301,705 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide excellence in support services to all South Dakota long term care facilities. To fulfill this mission, the South Dakota health care association provides demonstrated leadership in education, information, networking partnerships, and influences sound regulatory policies and legislation. The association is committed to the well-being of the elderly and disabled, and serves as an advocate for skilled nursing facilities, assisted living facilities, and senior living.

What it reported doing in 2024

The South Dakota health care association (sdhca) is the leading trade association representing long term care organizations, including skilled nursing care, assisted living, and congregate living throughout South Dakota. Members include both not-for-profit and proprietary providers. Our membership also encompasses multi-facility chains and independently owned facilities. The South Dakota health care association was founded in 1951 as a professional organization bringing together concerned providers to improve the quality of long term care. The sdhca is an affiliate of the national center for assisted living (ncal) and the american health care association (ahca), which is the largest national association representing long term care providers. Advocacy - sdhca serves as a strong advocate for long term care providers in South Dakota. This advocacy includes effective lobbying at the state legislature, representation of our members before regulators, and maintaining a strong presence in Washington through ahca. Because we only represent long term care organizations, our advocacy is credible and effective. Communication - long term care is an increasingly regulated and fast changing industry. Few providers have the time to keep up with these changes. Sdhca members receive concise and timely reports of important information affecting their industry. Members receive weekly summaries of events during the South Dakota legislative session. In addition, they receive monthly newsletters and updates on fast breaking changes in government regulations. Professional education - sdhca sponsors three major educational sessions annually along with other educational opportunities throughout the year. Educational programs offered by the sdhca are targeted specifically for long term care providers and feature nationally known speakers and up to the minute topics. Special programs are also offered for the various professional care providers and are designed with their input. As an sdhca member, your facility staff receives discounted registration and priority admission. Innovation - sdhca is proud of its successful public relation campaign that has improved both the image of aging and particularly long term care providers. As part of this campaign, a club was developed to honor the state's centenarians through a program called the century club. In addition, a dakota masterworks art show is available to all South Dakota seniors. These programs have generated very positive results in communities statewide.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 93% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.08; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.2%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $302K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.