Austin Habitat for Humanity
Legal name: Austin Habitat for Humanity Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742373217
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Austin, Texas, US
- Phone
- (512) 472-8788
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $31,085,624
- Expenses
- $21,295,073
- Assets
- $75,787,384
- Liabilities
- $33,566,307
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
36 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHELE ANDERSON (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHELE ANDERSON (CEO): $405,099 total reported compensation
- DONALD K MCPHEE (CFO): $245,257 total reported compensation
- WAYNE GERAMI (COO): $230,593 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Seeking to put God's love into action, Habitat for Humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope.
What it reported doing in 2024
Home construction - home construction program for austin habitat for humanity (ahfh) serves families earning 50% - 80% of median income. Ahfh offers qualified families the opportunity to build and purchase a home at an affordable price with an affordable mortgage payment. Ahfh homes earn 3 stars under the austin green building program, lowering utility costs and improving the environment. Partner families donate 300 'sweat equity' hours toward the construction of other partner homes as well as their future home. Partner families also participate in 8 courses of homebuyer education and financial literacy education to prepare for the transition to homeownership. Counseling and other assistance is offered throughout their homeownership. The one-on-one housing counseling provided since 2004 has been key to sustaining the financial well-being of our partner families. Ahfh homeownership and financial/credit counseling services are also provided for families who enter the program but aren't qualified at the time of application.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 62
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 57.4%; rating input score 57
- Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.04 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 31.5%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.56; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.2%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 7 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 57.4% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $16.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $405K · 36 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $9.7M reported
- Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.