The United Methodist Retirement Homes, Inc.

Legal name: The United Methodist Retirement Homes Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
560634527
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Durham, NC, United States
Phone
(919) 384-3000
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$113,193,566
Expenses
$97,300,260
Assets
$490,784,645
Liabilities
$345,627,737

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JONATHAN ERICKSON (CORPORATE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • HEATHER MARCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (CV))
  • LAURIE STALLINGS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (CG))
  • AMY SHOOTER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (WP))

Highest reported compensation

  • STACY DOBSON (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $407,013 total reported compensation
  • LAURIE STALLINGS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (CG)): $390,437 total reported compensation
  • HEATHER MARCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (CV)): $296,194 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mission, Vision & Values Our Mission The mission of The United Methodist Retirement Homes, Inc., a faith-based, nonprofit, Life Plan organization, is to provide a lifestyle of wellness and overall enrichment with access to long-term care for a diverse population of senior adults. The mission of The United Methodist Retirement Homes, Inc., a faith-based, nonprofit, Life Plan organization, is to provide a lifestyle of wellness and overall enrichment with access to long-term care for a diverse population of senior adults. Our Vision.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operate life plan communities (continuing care retirement communities) including skilled nursing facilities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 93% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 96
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.6%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 88.4%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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; 77th 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; 77th 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.04; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.7; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 75.6% of revenue deployed · 88.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $86M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $407K · 25 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $26.5M reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

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 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.