City First Enterprises Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522101165
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027454490
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,698,626
Expenses
$8,979,733
Assets
$86,322,884
Liabilities
$54,752,318

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • OSWALDO ACOSTA (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • OSWALDO ACOSTA (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $418,558 total reported compensation
  • RODRIGO CORDON (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $234,382 total reported compensation
  • JONATHAN REYES (CHIEF LENDING OFFICER): $213,415 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

City first enterprises is a community development financial institution specializing in flexible lending for affordable housing, commercial real estate, small businesses, non-profits, clean energy, and homeownership. With a mission to create equitable financial solutions to support people and communities in achieving their economic aspirations, we envision a future where all people and communities transform their futures through equitable access to capital.

What it reported doing in 2025

Managed portfolio of deployed funds in subordinated loans to nonprofits, small businesses, green energy, and affordable housing organizations within the greater Washington metropolitan community, as well as provide technical assistance and credit counseling to borrowers. Continued creation of permanently affordable housing by wholly owned subsidiary.

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 91% 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 related-organization disclosures are missing and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 91.8%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.4%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.61; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.63; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92% of revenue deployed · 91.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $419K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.