Amos House Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061186179
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Danbury, CT, USA
Phone
2037919277
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$125,786
Expenses
$115,483
Assets
$229,360
Liabilities
$104,367

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BENJAMIN CHIANESE (PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA CICARELLI (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • NEIL BRISSON (TREASURER)
  • BENJAMIN CHIANESE (PRESIDENT)
  • RANDALL GLENDINNING (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The amos house program was started in 1986 by five area churches that recognized an unmet need in the New York/Connecticut area to help homeless families move to permanent housing and improve their lives. The founders felt that homelessness was the result of a variety of issues, and each situation was unique. Therefore, they structured a program that met the individual needs of each family and recognized that once in permanent housing, these families would become valuable contributors to society.centerpiece of the amos house program is a residential facility in danbury that is adaptable for families of various sizes. Participants in the program live in the facility, sharing common kitchen, dining, bath and communal areas, all the

What it reported doing in 2020

To provide a setting for individuals and families to become self sufficient and gain self respect in order to become active members of the community

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.8%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 83.7%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.2%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.99; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.46; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -19.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.8% of revenue deployed · 83.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $97K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2014 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.