St Margaret's House & Hospital for Babies

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
141338522
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Albany, NY, USA
Phone
5185913300
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nursing, Convalescent Facilities

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,972,510
Expenses
$18,405,876
Assets
$13,527,607
Liabilities
$9,041,511

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES COLEMAN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • GREGORY J SORRENTINO (TREASURER): $248,785 total reported compensation
  • STANLEY B SEGAL ESQ (SECRETARY): $163,743 total reported compensation
  • BETH BARENDS (EXECUTIVE DI): $120,560 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Long-term health care for children and young adults.

What it reported doing in 2015

St. Margaret's center is a long-term care skilled nursing facility that provides 24-hour per day medical, nursing, ventilator and therapy services while supporting an individual's quality of life. The care is specialized to children and young adults beginning as young as birth. The majority of the residents are medically fragile and they have multiple disabilties and cognitive impairments. In 2010 a new wing was added to the existing building. St. Margaret's center provides long-term care services and offers 56 pediatric, 20 young adult, 16 ventilator, and 2 short term respite beds. St. Margaret's center is primarily funded by nys medicaid.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 12.2%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.67; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.2%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.1% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $249K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 15 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: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.