Tel-hai Apartments Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 239118208
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Honey Brook, PA, USA
- Phone
- 6102739333
- Rating
- 53
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $318,403
- Expenses
- $246,732
- Assets
- $652,851
- Liabilities
- $1,628,818
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DAVID SHENK (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- DAVID SHENK (PRESIDENT & CEO): $301,997 total reported compensation
- SHARON CANULL (CFO/ASST. SECRETARY): $167,743 total reported compensation
- PAUL S BURKHOLDER (VP, FACILITIES & PROJECT MANAGER): $159,962 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 rent subsidized apartments to low-income elderly (over 62) or handicapped or disabled individuals (over 18). The federal subsidized apartment building has 37 one bedroom apartments. Continued on schedule otel hai retirement community's mission statement is to provide high quality care and services to enhance personal dignity, autonomy and lifelong enrichment as a demonstration of christ's love for all persons.
What it reported doing in 2024
Tel hai apartments provides rent subsidized housing in the form of 37 apartments for elderly and/or handicapped individuals. Over the course of the year the units were 98% occupied.services available to residents include a community room, resident activities, coin operated laundry facilities, onsite building management and maintenance and on campus shuttle service. Housekeeping, dining venues, and shopping trips are available for a fee.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 89% 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
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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 37
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 37.1%; rating input score 37
- Program expense ratio: 47.9%; rating input score 48
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st 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: 22.5%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.65; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.49; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 33.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 37.1% of revenue deployed · 47.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $118K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $302K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 3 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.