Building Affordable Strategic Innovative Communities Co Housing Kitsap

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912170682
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Bremerton, WA, USA
Phone
3605356142
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,024
Expenses
$5,446
Assets
$674,509
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Joseph Donnelly (Director)
  • Melinda Monroe (Board Chair)
  • Phedra Elliot (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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization was created to allow innovative fundraising opportunities and to provide services to enhance the housing authority's ability to meet affordable housing needs in the community.

What it reported doing in 2016

The operations of the organization consist of making cash distributions from the new markets tax credit entity owned by this organization for the benefit of housing kitsap, a local housing authority and the supported organization. Low income housing efforts of housing kitsap are funded as deemed appropriate by the governing boards of both the supporting and supported organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 85% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 39
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 90
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 10.7%; rating input score 11
  • Program expense ratio: 98.7%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 89.1%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 123.85; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 87.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 10.7% of revenue deployed · 98.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 11/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.