Visiting Nurse Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 454929618
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Saginaw, MI, USA
- Phone
- 9897996020
- Rating
- 59
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Home Health Care
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $19,971,075
- Expenses
- $21,246,487
- Assets
- $6,311,649
- Liabilities
- $6,907,773
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DIANE GLASGOW (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- KEVIN ALBOSTA (VP OF FINANCE): $2,242,171 total reported compensation
- MATTHEW DEIBEL (DIRECTOR): $732,152 total reported compensation
- PATRICE LANCZAK (SECRETARY): $610,622 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To promote health, individual and community; to prevent disease; to provide health care for the sick in their homes and elsewhere, and to maintain a desirable organization to promote the above purposes. To help meet the physical, intellectual, emotional and spiritual needs of terminally ill persons and their families; and to educate persons in the organization's service area about the needs of terminally ill persons and their families.
What it reported doing in 2024
Home care - provided 51,259 visitshospice - provided 16,266 days of carepalliative care - provided 15,117 visits pharmacy/infusion - provided 5,937 prescriptionsdurable medical equipment - provided 20,770 dme units
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% 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
MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 55
- Accountability: 42
- Sustainability: 17
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 82.2%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 77.2%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 6th 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: No; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: 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: -6.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.09; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 82.2% of revenue deployed · 77.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $16.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $2.2M · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 8 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.