Daffodil House Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521891246
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2026390361
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Garden Club, Horticultural Program

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$299,175
Expenses
$88,979
Assets
$3,575,157
Liabilities
$2,968,696

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide persons with HIV/AIDS and other disabilities with housing and related services specially designed to meet their physical, social and psychological needs.

What it reported doing in 2010

The organization was incorporated in the district of columbia for the purpose of owning and operating rental housing for persons with HIV/AIDS and other disabilities. It owns a property with 30 housing units located in northwest Washington, dc.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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: 100
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 70.3%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 40.18; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.83; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $80K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $60K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.