Uplands Village

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
620479194
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pleasant Hill, TN, USA
Phone
9312773518
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,658,867
Expenses
$13,789,516
Assets
$17,407,817
Liabilities
$12,834,953

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NOAH MOORE (CEO/PRESIDENT)
  • CATHY TAYLOR (INTERIM CEO/PRESIDENT)
  • HERSCHEL MURNER (CEO/PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • HERSCHEL MURNER (CEO/PRESIDENT): $163,501 total reported compensation
  • CATHY TAYLOR (INTERIM CEO/PRESIDENT): $129,562 total reported compensation
  • NOAH MOORE (CEO/PRESIDENT): $7,231 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 mission of uplands is to build an exceptional caring community that inspires all to thrive with dignity and independence.

What it reported doing in 2024

The mission of uplands village is to provide an affordable and intellectually stimilating continuing care retirement community that is committed to delivering superior care to senior adults who have been and remain committed to issues of social justice and a faithful tradition of service to others.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 71.2%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited

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: -8.9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.26; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.74; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.6% of revenue deployed · 71.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $164K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.9M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.