Collaborative Community Housing Initiative
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 834685695
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Highland Park, IL, USA
- Phone
- 8476810267
- Rating
- 57
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $150,698
- Expenses
- $39,244
- Assets
- $220,791
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
People named in this filing
- LAURIE WILLIAMS (CHAIR)
- MARLA DAVIS HENRY (MEMBERSHIP CHAIR)
- RICHARD KOENIG (DEVELOPMENT CHAIR)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Collaborative community housing initiative is a nonprofit organization dedicated to helping special-needs adults obtain housing opportunities not otherwise available to them.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 70% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
MIXED - 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: 18
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 87
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 10.2%; rating input score 10
- Program expense ratio: 36.5%; rating input score 36
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 74%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.63; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 29.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 24.6% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 10.2% of revenue deployed · 36.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $14K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 10/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 36/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.