Capital Area Multi-housing Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311793354
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5123479953
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$937,636
Expenses
$159,300
Assets
$3,755,714
Liabilities
$365,697

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREA SHIELDS (PRESIDENT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • HOPPY HAYDEN (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREA SHIELDS (PRESIDENT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $179,230 total reported compensation
  • HOPPY HAYDEN (VICE PRESIDENT): $19,500 total reported compensation
  • RON CUNNINGHAM (DIRECTOR): $15,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Provide a means of financing the costs of residential ownership and development that will provide decent, safe, affordable and sanitary housing for persons of low and moderate income.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization is the sole member of ten general partner entities involved in partnerships actively developing, constructing and operating ten affordable multifamily housing apartment complexes in kyle, leander, round rock, austin, elgin, lockhart and san marcos, Texas. In 2024, six apartment complexes provided over 1,400 affordable housing residences. At december 31, 2024, four apartment complexes were under construction that will offer an additional 1,052 affordable housing residences.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 14.6%; rating input score 15
  • Program expense ratio: 98.4%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 83%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 23.58; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.9%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -47.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 14.6% of revenue deployed · 98.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $157K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $179K · 3 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $157K reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 26 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.