Lutheran Senior Services of Greater St. Louis (Heisinger Bluffs)
Legal name: The Cole County Lutheran Home Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 431147326
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2022
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2022
- Location
- St Louis, MO, USA
- Phone
- 3149689313
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Supportive Housing for Older Adults
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $19,809,771
- Expenses
- $8,827,777
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
30 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ADAM MARLES (PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ADAM MARLES (PRESIDENT/CEO): $465,932 total reported compensation
- GARRY ANDERSON (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $359,350 total reported compensation
- CHAD SNEED (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $344,736 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To address and meet the needs of aged persons, including housing, healthcare, and financial security.
What it reported doing in 2022
Operation of a life plan community that offers a continuum of care that includes 65 independent living apartments and 46 assisted living units, 20 assisted living memory care units and 52 skilled nursing beds, which include 20 medicaid certified beds.benevolent care assistance is also provided, which includes medicaid contractual allowances. Total benevolent care assistance provided was $745,384 , of which $745,384 is offsetting program service revenue.the organization's residential facilities and programs are specifically designed to meet and maintain its aged residents physical and emotional well-being, as well as meet their recreational, social, and religious needs.the organization provides care to residents and clients who meet certain criteria under its financial assistance policy without charge. Key elements used to determine eligibility include verification of financial need and proper disclosure upon admission. Lutheran senior services also provides care to residents under the medicaid program for which the costs to provide such care exceeds reimbursement. The organization funds this difference through its operations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 75% 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: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 52
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 68.3%; rating input score 68
- Program expense ratio: 83.3%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 6th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 24th 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: 55.4%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 68.3% of revenue deployed · 83.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $466K · 30 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $930K reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2022
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.