Cecil Housing Development Fund Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 142012874
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2122529377
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,838,866
- Expenses
- $2,915,651
- Assets
- $6,794,911
- Liabilities
- $11,223,104
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAMES M DILL (TRUSTEE/TREASURER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- MOLLY MATTIMORE (TRUSTEE/SECRETARY/DEP EXEC DIRECTOR): $198,533 total reported compensation
- KRISTI CILENTI (DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS): $194,424 total reported compensation
- DAN DANAHER (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $191,301 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization operates permanent supportive and affordable housing.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization operates the low-income supportive housing project known as the cecil. The project has 89 sro housing units and is situated at 206-210 west 118th street, ny, ny. The organization provides onsite case management services to residential tenants. All admitted residents are single adults and are required to meet us department of housing and urban development's criteria for homeless, disability and low income. Social services are funded by contracts with nyc department of homeless services and nyc department of health and mental hygiene. The project leases ground floor and cellar space to an unrelated commercial tenant whose rents help fund services to the project's residential tenants.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 52
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- 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: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 7th 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: -2.7%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.33; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.65; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $199K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $230K reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 4 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.