Cornerstoneabbott House Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521970656
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4102302100
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Housing Rehabilitation

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$0
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Cornerstone/abbott house, inc. (the organization) was formed as a not-for-profit, non-stock corporation under the laws of the state of Maryland on march 29, 1996 for the purpose of acquiring, rehabilitating and operating a rental housing project under section 236 of the national housing act. Hud regulates such projects as to rent charges and operating methods. The project consists of one hundred (100) units located in columbia, Maryland, and is currently operating under the name of harper house apartments. Surplus cash, as defined by hud, is required to be deposited into the residual receipts account.

What it reported doing in 2012

Provided housing for low income persons and their families, 100 units provided

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: NotEnoughData
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th 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: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: Limited
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 2 of 2 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2011 to 2012
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Series filing activity did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.