The Blakeford at Green Hills

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621533400
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
6156659505
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$28,275,753
Expenses
$30,021,535
Assets
$126,632,155
Liabilities
$149,152,209

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRAIN BARNES (CEO/PRESIDENT)
  • ALLISON GRIFFITH (COO/VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRAIN BARNES (CEO/PRESIDENT): $450,453 total reported compensation
  • ALLISON GRIFFITH (COO/VICE PRESIDENT): $163,955 total reported compensation
  • SARAH BISHOP (SALES & MARKETING DIRECTOR): $157,533 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Provide quality lifestyle options and services to senior adults that encourage independence, individuality and privacy, while creating both economic value and life enrichment opportunities for all those we serve.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization provides long term care facilities in the state of Tennessee, specifically designed to meet the physical, social & psychological needs of elderly and infirm persons, including but not limited to housing, buildings, structures, equipment, furnishings, programs and related health and other services contributing to their health, security, happiness, and physical and mental well-being. There were approximately 771 persons served in 2024.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.4%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.2%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.22; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.18; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $29M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $450K · 20 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $8.9M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.