Cedar Rapids Student-Built House Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237309689
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Cedar Rapids, IA, USA
Phone
3197312119
Rating
32
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$36,821
Expenses
$6,885
Assets
$221,446
Liabilities
$218,009

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACKIE POWERS (President)
  • DAVE SMITH (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • STEVE HANISH (Director)
  • ANDY JACOBSEN (Treasurer)
  • DAN LOUGH (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Giving students hands-on training and the experience of building a house

What it reported doing in 2025

Student-Built House Program: Public and parochial high school students are given hands-on training and the experience of building a house

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 81.3%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 32.16; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.98; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -25.9% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 12 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.