Encino Development & Management Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850471116
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Albuquerque, NM, USA
Phone
5059247425
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$104,141
Expenses
$439,961
Assets
$9,752,721
Liabilities
$243,835

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN ROCKWELL (PRESIDENT)
  • GREGORY LEACH (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTINA STANLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTINA STANLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $163,235 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of this corporation is to provide management for all encino properties: to provide rental housing and related facilities and services for lower income elderly households that meet the corporation's eligibility criteria for housing. This housing is provided by a non-profit substantially below market basis, specially designed to meet the physical, social, and psychological needs of the aged; to borrow money and issue evidence of indebtedness in furtherance of any or all of the objects of its business, and to secure the same by mortgage, pledge, or other lien on the corporations property; to do and perform all acts reasonably necessary to accomplish the purposes of the corporation, including the execution of a regulatory agreement with the secretary of housing and urban development.

What it reported doing in 2025

Edm oversees the management services of the following properties: encino terrace, encino el paseo, and villa teresa through the use of a management company.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.2%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -322.5%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 22.17; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $423K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.