Vivie
Legal name: Walker Methodist
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 411916102
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Alexandria, MN, US
- Phone
- 3207631164
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Nursing, Convalescent Facilities
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $36,335,688
- Expenses
- $34,253,978
- Assets
- $108,236,671
- Liabilities
- $123,762,189
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Mark Anderson (President/CEO)
- Scott RiddleFrmr Officer (President/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Mark Anderson (President/CEO): $667,572 total reported compensation
- Scott RiddleFrmr Officer (President/CEO): $654,250 total reported compensation
- Russell GrundhauserFrmr Officer (Chief Adm & Integ Officer): $400,314 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 enrich, empower, and elevate people throughout life’s journey.
What it reported doing in 2024
Walker Methodist, as the sole member of Walker Thompson Hill, LLC, provides senior living with services, transitional care unit and assisted living services in a 71-unit community located in west St. Paul, Minnesota. Residents may receive a variety of health services to meet their individual needs, and are offered opportunities for physical activity, social interaction, intergenerational activities, creative intergenerational activities, creative expression, spiritual care, intellectual advancement, and charitable giving.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 most voting board members are independent. 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: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 60
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.9%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 5.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.16; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.14; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 81.9% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $29.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $668K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.9M reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 20 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.