Alden Court Nursing Care & Rehabilitation Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043109579
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fairhaven, MA, US
Phone
508-991-8600
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nursing, Convalescent Facilities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,406,021
Expenses
$12,762,706
Assets
$17,944,609
Liabilities
$7,915,668

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID MCCREADY (EX-OFFICIO, PRESIDENT)
  • RAYFORD KRUGER MD (FORMER PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • KEITH HOVAN (FORMER PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID MCCREADY (EX-OFFICIO, PRESIDENT): $1,798,618 total reported compensation
  • RENEE CLARK (FORMER OFFICER): $1,424,360 total reported compensation
  • RAYFORD KRUGER MD (FORMER PRESIDENT & CEO): $1,349,066 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The goal of Alden Court is to create a home like atmosphere for the residents.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operates a 142-bed related non-profit nursing facility known as alden court nursing care & rehabilitation center to southcoast long-term care services, inc. During the fiscal year ended september 30, 2025, the organization operated a 142-bed skilled nursing facility, commencing operations on february 1, 2025, and provided patient care for 32,227 patient days, with an average occupancy rate of approximately 94%. Approximately 57% of patient days were provided to medicaid beneficiaries, 27% to medicare beneficiaries and 13% to private pay patients, and 3% to managed care patients.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 85.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 72.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 86.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.8M · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 10 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.