Elizabeth City Habitat for Humanity

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561723668
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Elizabeth City, NC, USA
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$438,440
Expenses
$60,467
Assets
$1,490,229
Liabilities
$128,396

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Josh Mirrotto (President)

People named in this filing

  • Lauren Ennis (Member)
  • Ann Thomas (Member)
  • Norma James (Member)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Seeking to put Gods love into action, Habitat brings people together to build homes, communities and hope. Elizabeth City Habitat for Humanitys goal is to help families who do not qualify for the traditional loan to become a homeowner.

What it reported doing in 2025

Elizabeth City Habitat for Humanity has been successful in partnering with families and communities to accomplish their mission for safe and affordable shelter. ECHforH started a program for low income seniors, the Homeowners Repair Program. This program helps toward their mission by helping seniors stay safe by repairing their homes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 95% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 11
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 3.5%; rating input score 4
  • Program expense ratio: 25.6%; rating input score 26
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 86.2%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.65; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 3.5% of revenue deployed · 25.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 4/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.