Center City Housing Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363485584
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Duluth, MN, USA
Phone
2187227161
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,756,085
Expenses
$14,544,990
Assets
$73,991,429
Liabilities
$71,064,096

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAREN OLESEN (BOARD PRESIDENT)
  • ANDRES GONZALEZ (BOARD VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NANCY CASHMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NANCY CASHMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $174,969 total reported compensation
  • KRISTIN MEYER (OPERATIONS DIRECTOR): $129,917 total reported compensation
  • LORI REILLY (REGIONAL HOUSING DIRECTOR): $109,130 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Cchc develops, owns and/or manages quality housing opportunities and provides associated services for those most in need.

What it reported doing in 2024

Supportive services - this program consists of the supportive services provided to residents of the san marco, river crest, gage east, hillside apartments, gateway, park place, garfield, cahill, birchwood, mayowood, river heights, and the various family supportive housing projects owned by the corporation, plus silver creek in rochester (not owned by the corporation). Examples of supportive services include but are not limited to case management, educational classes, nutrition services, medical assistance, budgeting assistance and social services referrals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 68% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 91.7%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -5.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.09; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.96; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.8%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97% of revenue deployed · 91.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $13.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 16 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.6M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 32 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.

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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.