Westminster Gardens

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
951644046
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Glendale, CA, USA
Phone
8182470420
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nursing, Convalescent Facilities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,724,618
Expenses
$3,352,797
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN H COCHRANE III (PRESIDENT/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN H COCHRANE III (PRESIDENT/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $898,356 total reported compensation
  • PAMELA S CLAASSEN UNTIL 1219 (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $673,135 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL OGUS (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $671,848 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the organization is to redefine the meaning of aging well for adults 55 and older, and deliver products and services that offer opportunities to pursue engaged, purposeful lives.

What it reported doing in 2019

Westminster gardens, a continuing care retirement community, provides housing and health care for the elderly. Direct resident care for seniors includes independent living and assisted living, memory care, nursing, and home care. It also provides outreach and wellness services including meals program, housekeeping, maintenance and activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% 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

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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 54
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.5%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 22.2%; rating input score 22; 6th 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: 10%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.8%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.5% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $898K · 22 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $603K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 69 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.