United Methodist Senior Services of Tupelo Area Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
640746771
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tupelo, MS, USA
Phone
6628448977
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Centers
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,003,374
Expenses
$2,664,386
Assets
$7,279,194
Liabilities
$3,861,238

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVE MCALILLY (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • JERONE LACKING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JIM ZUELZKE (VICE PRESIDENT FINANCE)
  • JEANNE CANTIN (VICE PRESIDENT/HR)
  • BRITTANY CUEVAS (VICE PRESIDENT OF PHILANTHROPY)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVE MCALILLY (PRESIDENT/CEO): $678,537 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTIE VANCE (VICE PRES/COO): $326,286 total reported compensation
  • JIM ZUELZKE (VICE PRESIDENT FINANCE): $285,449 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

United methodist senior services of the tupelo area is dedicated to providing housing and personal care services to the elderly or disabled in the spirit of christian love.

What it reported doing in 2024

The mitchell center personal care facility offers independence and privacy to older adults while providing the required level of daily assistance through a loving and caring staff. Services include medication monitoring, daily housekeeping and laundry, assistance with frooming, three daily meals, and a full range of activities and outings. The mitvhell center offers private rooms with large bathrooms, a beauty shop, dining rooms, and chapel.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.9%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 75.8%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 84.2%; rating input score 84; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 11.3%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.73; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.53; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.9% of revenue deployed · 75.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 19 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $679K · 22 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $157K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 17 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.