Warrior Run Manor Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232137458
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Frederick, MD, USA
Phone
5705249930
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$782,673
Expenses
$697,223
Assets
$1,704,473
Liabilities
$3,036,310

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHAUN SMITH (PRESIDENT)
  • KENT KILGUS (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHAUN SMITH (PRESIDENT): $478,417 total reported compensation
  • JOHN MCDONOUGH (DIRECTOR): $194,911 total reported compensation
  • BECKY BAUER (DIRECTOR): $75,273 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 create the highest quality of life by encouraging purposeful living through personalized, progressive and compassionate communities deeply rooted in serving others.

What it reported doing in 2024

Warrior run manor, inc. Operates a non-profit hud assisted housing facility designed to meet the special needs of low income retired individuals 62 years of age and older, as well as handicapped and disabled individuals. Warrior run manor has 75 units, comprised of 72 one-bedroom apartments and 3 two-bedroom apartments. 7 apartments have been specifically designed for handicapped individuals. Of those 7 apartments, 4 apartments are designed for wheelchair tenants and 3 are equipped for non-wheelchair residents.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 70% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.6%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 63.6%; rating input score 64
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 10.9%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.44; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.78; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.6% of revenue deployed · 63.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $443K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $478K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 15 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.