Edgemont Elms Housing Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
050631880
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Durham, NC, USA
Phone
9196831551
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$445,758
Expenses
$698,885
Assets
$1,191,374
Liabilities
$918,489

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANTHONY SNELL (INTERIM CEO/DIRECTOR OF DE)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANTHONY SNELL (INTERIM CEO/DIRECTOR OF DE): $223,834 total reported compensation
  • RALPH STALEY (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $152,122 total reported compensation
  • ASHANTI BROWN (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $138,114 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Edgemont elms is a non-profit entity whose mission is to acquire, construct, develop and maintain affordable housing, and to revitalize communities and neighborhoods within durham, North Carolina.

What it reported doing in 2025

Edgemont elms is a non-profit entity whose mission is to acquire, construct, develop and maintain affordable housing, and to revitalize communities and neighborhoods within durham, North Carolina. It currently operates edgemont elms townhomes, which is comprised of fifty-eight (58) apartment units including sixteen (16) public housing units. Edgemont elms was completed in 1990 and is located near downtown durham. This 58 unit complex serves as part of a redevelopment plan for the edgemont community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -56.8%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.7; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.77; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $603K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $224K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 4 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.