The Glenridge on Palmer Ranch
Legal name: The Glenridge on Palmer Ranch Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 593472733
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Sarasota, FL, US
- Phone
- 941-552-5369
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $54,641,933
- Expenses
- $52,383,536
- Assets
- $247,269,781
- Liabilities
- $339,076,170
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- REGINA M OSBORN (LIFE PLAN CONSULTANT): $580,875 total reported compensation
- LISA ANN EVANS (LIFE PLAN CONSULTANT): $380,047 total reported compensation
- JENNIFER BRUNEMAN (LIFE PLAN CONSULTANT): $206,591 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Glenridge on Palmer Ranch is a Life Fulfilling Community® that helps people live their best lives by creating a therapeutic environment where social and cultural forces positively shape lives.
What it reported doing in 2024
The glenridge has a permanent certificate of authority and certificate of need from the state of Florida to operate as a continuing care retirement facility. The glenridge constructed a continuing care retirement community containing approximately four hundred seventy (470) living and nursing units to provide housing, health care, and other related services to residents in sarasota, fl.
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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.7%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $193.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.1%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.72; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.37; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 81.7% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $45.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $581K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $21.3M reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.