Medford Leas

Legal name: The Estaugh Ta Medford Leas

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
210633410
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2022
Location
Lumberton, NJ, US
Phone
866-386-4038
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$44,535,187
Expenses
$41,428,329
Assets
$198,321,907
Liabilities
$119,905,471

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEREMY VICKERS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEREMY VICKERS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $654,457 total reported compensation
  • JAMES C D'AMICO (MEDICAL DIRECTOR): $300,592 total reported compensation
  • JEFFERY RANALLI (PHYSICIAN): $250,331 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To create and advance individual and community well-being for people aged 55 years and older

What it reported doing in 2025

Medford leas is a leading senior adult community successfully meeting the total lifestyle needs of its residents with innovative and highly valued programs, life enhancing and sustaining services, technological and environmental advances, up to date residential homes and apartments and well-equipped facilities all in highly desirable arboretum settings. Medford leas provides maintenance-free living to its residents. Primary services include: healthcare, dining, housekeeping, laundry, interior and exterior maintenance, groundskeeping and snow removal. Other services include individualized fitness, transportation and a vast array of activities for the residents. Medford leas is a community of approximately 520 residents who live in nearly 400 homes of varying sizes and designs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.1%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 90.8%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 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: 7%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.79; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.6; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 88.1% of revenue deployed · 90.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $37.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $654K · 18 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $16.5M reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 17 filing years from 2009 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.