Catholic Worker Hospitality House

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943148391
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Bruno, CA, USA
Phone
6508270706
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$415,698
Expenses
$404,871
Assets
$2,030,722
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jennifer Lewis (Board President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Peter Stiehler (Director, board member): $67,318 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Catholic Worker Hospitality House exists to serve the needs of low-income and homeless individuals through the direct practice of the Works of Mercy -- feeding the hungry, sheltering the homeless, visiting the sick and imprisoned, clothing the naked, giving drink to the thirst, and comforting the afflicted.

What it reported doing in 2025

AFFORDABLE AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING: Operate three low-income housing units in San Mateo County: Second Ave House, Chapman House, and Masson House. At Second ave and Chapman House rooms are rented to former dining room and shelter guests, thus providing permanent affordable housing to formerly homeless individuals. The third unit, Masson House, is rented to a low-income family with four young children. Finally, own Peralta House in Oakland CA which is operated by Cre8innovations as transitional re-entry housing for individuals coming out of prison. In 2022 we completed construction on an Auxiliary Dwelling Unit (ADU) in the backyard of theSecond Ave House. This ADU now provides more affordable housing for those we serve.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 45
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.9%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 98.4%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $84.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97%; rating input score 97; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.6%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.02; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.6%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.9% of revenue deployed · 98.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $398K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $67K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.