Douglas M Bibby Nmhc Research Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475446854
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2029742313
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$179,770
Expenses
$100,267
Assets
$4,828,680
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHARON WILSON GENO (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHARON WILSON GENO (PRESIDENT): $1,105,416 total reported compensation
  • KENNY EMSON (TREASURER): $694,528 total reported compensation
  • MARK OBRINSKY (SECRETARY): $235,427 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization produces research on behalf of multifamily housing providers. More than 40 million americans call an apartment home. Yet limited research exists on the industry that finances, develops and operates those homes and contributes more than $3.9 trillion to the economy annually. As the apartment industry has evolved in size and sophistication, research needs have expanded. The foundation engages with academic organizations and other foundations to address critical voids in apartment data. The work supported by the foundation raises the industry's standard of performance and encourages worldwide investment in the sector.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 70% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 14
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.3%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44.2%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 48.16; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 418.5%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -29.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $100K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.