University Retirement Community at Davis

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
931179254
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Davis, CA, USA
Phone
8887246424
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Reported finances

Revenue
$38,971,973
Expenses
$33,206,913
Assets
$190,264,441
Liabilities
$132,275,969

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALIKA CASTILLO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALIKA CASTILLO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $385,388 total reported compensation
  • TROY MARTIN (DIRECTOR OF SALES): $243,356 total reported compensation
  • MARIA BURTON (ADMINISTRATOR): $224,008 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

University retirement community at davis provides continuing care, quality services, and diverse opportunities that enhance the lives of our residents.

What it reported doing in 2024

University retirement community at davis is a continuing care retirement community, dedicated to enhancing our residents' quality of life in a stimulating, secure environment. We provide high-quality services including housing, nutritious meals, nursing, housekeeping, maintenance and other support to those we serve. Our levels of service include independent living, assisted living, memory care, and skilled nursing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 95% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.1%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 80.5%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 14.8%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.73; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.7; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.1% of revenue deployed · 80.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $26.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $385K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $9.5M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 51 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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.