Community Housing Services Agency Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 581850981
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Savannah, GA, USA
- Phone
- 9126512169
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Rehabilitation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,019,343
- Expenses
- $2,485,829
- Assets
- $19,596,431
- Liabilities
- $65,650
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
People named in this filing
- DEBORAH WRIGHT (CHAIR)
- RICHARD EVANS (TREASURER)
- FRED MADSEN (SECRETARY)
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
As a community development financial institution ("cdfi"), and administrators of the savannah affordable housing fund ("sahf"), chsa provides financing and technical assistance to individuals and businesses. (continued at schedule o)(continued from page 2) chsa is focused on creating, improving, and retaining real estate workforce and affordable housing, in minority, low income, and disinvested communities in chatham county, Georgia.
What it reported doing in 2024
As part of chsa, the savannah affordable housing fund (sahf) is an innovative and meaningful way for banks, businesses, nonprofits and local governments to expand housing opportunities for savannah's modest-wage workforce and seniors. The sahf was established in 2012 by the city of savannah at the urging of stepup savannah with support from the savannah economic development authority, the savannah area chamber of commerce and other business and community leaders. It helps savannah address its local housing needs and opportunities. In 2024, sahf provided two hundred forty eight (248) loans and grants to the community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 69% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 94
- Sustainability: 91
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 56.7%; rating input score 57
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- 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: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- 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: 50.5%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.88; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 22% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 32.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 56.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.