The Gate of Beautiful

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811007220
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Modesto, CA, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Housing Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$236,947
Assets
$-236,947
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALBERT ELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • NICOLE ELL (Executive Director-Secretary-)
  • CARL CHANDLER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALBERT ELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $42,000 total reported compensation
  • NICOLE ELL (Executive Director-Secretary-): $36,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

IS A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION that its primary objective and purpose of the corporation shall be to establish and maintain residential care homes for the aged population and develop programs that will prove beneficial to the well being of the participants.

What it reported doing in 2016

LINE 4D - OTHER PROGRAM SERVICES DESCRIPTIONMusic therapy, pet therapy, physical therapy (exercise) one on one care, comfort care, art therapy.

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 16
  • Sustainability: 1
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: -1; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $237K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $42K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.