Architecture for Humanity Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300038297
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4159633511
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Visual Arts Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,011,838
Expenses
$8,667,036
Assets
$12,830,610
Liabilities
$2,991,648

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Architecture for humanity is a non-profit, tax-exempt organization that is dedicated to assisting at-risk populations in building a more sustainable future through the power of professional design. Architecture for humanity provides planning, design and construction services for projects related to poverty alleviation, disaster mitigation and reconstruction, post-conflict community development, facility design for at-risk populations, and addressing climate change through the built environment.

What it reported doing in 2012

Post-disaster reconstruction a significant portion of architecture for humanity's efforts were spent on its post-disaster reconstruction projects. These efforts were focused primarily in three post-disaster zones: 1) haiti (earthquake reconstruction efforts), 2) japan (earthquake/tsunami reconstruction efforts), and New York (hurricane sandy reconstruction efforts). In haiti, architecture for humanity helped rebuild ten schools, four clinics, planned three resurgent communities and provided a wide-range of technical assistance, training and support to local design and construction professionals, community partners and organizations. In japan, architecture for humanity made construction grants to eleven local businesses and organizations and helped over sixty small businesses rebuild and recover jobs in the disaster-affected regions. Other efforts include the rebuilding efforts in moore, Oklahoma, u.s., and the philippines.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 74.7%; rating input score 75; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 17th 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: 27.8%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.48; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 36.3% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 71.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 8 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $7.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $162K · 15 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2010 to 2012
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.