Assisi Homes of Gurnee Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363942336
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3038303300
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$570,700
Expenses
$643,655
Assets
$2,617,479
Liabilities
$99,387

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KASSIDI BOENING (VICE PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • MELISSA CLAYTON (VICE PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • EDGAR FLAGG III (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • FATMAH FARRAJ (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARK ANGELINI (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MELISSA CLAYTON (VICE PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR): $308,489 total reported compensation
  • MARK ANGELINI (PRESIDENT): $264,448 total reported compensation
  • JOE ROSENBLUM (SECRETARY/DIRECTOR): $242,964 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Assisi homes of gurnee, inc. Is a not-for-profit corporation formed on february 1, 1994 in accordance with the not-for-profit statutes of the state of Illinois. The corporation was formed for the purpose of operating a 60 unit community located in gurnee, Illinois which provides housing and related services for very low income elderly or disabled persons. The corporation receives housing assistance and a capital advance from the u.s. Department of housing and urban development pursuant to section 202 of the national housing act, as amended.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.2%; rating input score 97
  • 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th 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: -12.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.07; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.7%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $625K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $308K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 493 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.