Sunrise Village
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 411670808
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Willmar, MN, USA
- Phone
- 3202359532
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,024,167
- Expenses
- $3,961,504
- Assets
- $4,607,861
- Liabilities
- $1,023,387
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHELLE HAEFNER (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHELLE HAEFNER (CEO): $380,743 total reported compensation
- SAM QUAM (ADMINISTRATOR/VP OF OPERATIONS): $177,362 total reported compensation
- TROY PEDERSON (VP OF SENIOR HOUSING): $147,804 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Serving others together in faith, community and life.
What it reported doing in 2024
Sunrise village provides housing and assisted living for the elderly by operating a 55-unit independent living facility and a 37-unit assisted living facility in willmar, mn. Sunrise village independent apartments provide housing for those who are 62 and older and want a high level of independence combined with security and freedom from the responsibilities of yardwork, snow removal, and maintenance. For the year ended 9/30/25, sunrise village independent living served 55 people and an occupancy of 99.40%. Sunrise village assisted living apartments provide privacy and independence and assurance that personalized assistance is available. They are ideal for older persons who need supportive services, but do not need around-the-clock nursing care. For the year ended 9/30/25, sunrise village assisted living served 84 people, and had an occupancy of 98.20%.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.
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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 88.6%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 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: -31%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.16; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $381K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 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: 4 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.