Coalition of Homeless Service Providers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770381154
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Seaside, CA, USA
Phone
8318833080
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Voluntarism, and Grantmaking Foundations N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,793,351
Expenses
$4,790,860
Assets
$9,334,814
Liabilities
$8,690,830

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GREG BAKER (PRESIDENT)
  • JOCELYN CURRAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KATRINA MCKENZIE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATRINA MCKENZIE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $140,968 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To eliminate homelessness in monterey and san benito counties by promoting interagency coordination to develop and sustain a comprehensive system of housing and support services designed to maximize the self-sufficiency of individuals and families.

What it reported doing in 2024

Coc activities (cap, hud (coc planning), hmis, cars, yhdp (hud program)as the continuum of care (coc) coordinator for monterey and san benito counties, the coalition of homeless services providers continues to facilitate efforts to end homelessness, through coordination of services, regional planning & strategic efforts, and administration of federal and state funding. Chsp also administers the hud-mandated homeless management information system (hmis) and the local implementation of the coordinated entry system (ces or locally known as cars; coordinated assessment and referral system). Chsp's strategy and coordination efforts are to meet the regional 5-year lead me home plan to reduce homelessness by 2026.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 90% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 76% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.5%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 88.6%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $615.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 0.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.95; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.93; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.5% of revenue deployed · 88.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $141K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.