DuPage and Chicago South Suburbs Habitat for Humanity

Legal name: Chicago South Suburbs Habitat for Humanity

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363582576
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2022
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Wheaton, IL, USA
Phone
1-630-510-3737 ext. 318
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$887,014
Expenses
$704,298
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN GIUFFRE (PRESIDENT)
  • BOB SHIELD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOSEPH PROCTOR (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JENNIFER TAFF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • JOHN GIUFFRE (PRESIDENT)
  • BOB SHIELD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOSEPH PROCTOR (VICE PRESIDENT)

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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Seeking to put God’s love into action, Habitat for Humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope.

What it reported doing in 2022

Habitat builds or rehabs houses using primarily volunteer labor. Homesare sold to low income families at no profit and with an interest freeloan. In addition to a downpayment and monthly mortgage payments, homeowners invest hundreds of hours and their own labor (sweat equity)into building their habitat houses and houses for others. Habitat alsoprovides a winterization and painting program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 33
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.3%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 31.9%; rating input score 32
  • Fundraising efficiency: $37.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.6%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -25.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 25.3% of revenue deployed · 31.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $224K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.