The Mcgregor Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 340714356
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- East Cleveland, OH, USA
- Phone
- 2168518200
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $24,680,352
- Expenses
- $24,349,767
- Assets
- $136,299,645
- Liabilities
- $32,656,468
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANN CONN (CEO)
- YUVETTE BOZMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- ANN CONN (CEO): $454,545 total reported compensation
- JENNIFER HAYES (CFO/ASSISTANT TREASURER): $295,370 total reported compensation
- YUVETTE BOZMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $186,644 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 mcgregor home exists to provide a superior residence in east cleveland for individuals in need to age successfully in "a place they call home."
What it reported doing in 2024
Provided 50,955 resident days of care during the year. Served the elderly in the city of east cleveland, Ohio with dignified care in gracious surroundings. Offered living arrangements from assisted care to nursing plus a unit designed to serve the special needs of memory impaired residents and a temporary care program. Provided no-cost or reduced cost care to residents who meet certain specified criteria under its charity care policy. Offered a stimulating variety of social activities and cultural programs to its residents. Provided a safe and secure environment while maximizing the residents' independence and self-esteem. Also, provided an ideal environment for a full and happy lifestyle.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 77% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.3%; rating input score 81
- Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 69.2%; rating input score 69; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
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: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.6; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 81.3% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $20M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $455K · 28 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.2M reported
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 43 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 40 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.
- 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.