Fahe
Legal name: Federation of Appalachian Housing Enterprises Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 310986871
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Berea, KY, USA
- Phone
- 859.986.2321
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Management & Technical Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $39,038,744
- Expenses
- $23,515,850
- Assets
- $159,138,006
- Liabilities
- $99,800,737
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JIM KING (CEO AND PRESIDENT OF BOARD)
- LAURA MEADOWS (VICE PRESIDENT OF BOARD)
- SARA MORGAN (PRESIDENT OF FAHE, VICE PR)
- ROSALYN LAWSON (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF SINGLE FAMILY LENDING)
Highest reported compensation
- JIM KING (CEO AND PRESIDENT OF BOARD): $301,110 total reported compensation
- SARA MORGAN (PRESIDENT OF FAHE, VICE PR): $232,587 total reported compensation
- BRITTNEY MURPHY (CFO AND TREASURER): $157,894 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Fahe is a purpose-oriented Network of 50+ diverse community-based nonprofits serving the Appalachian states of AL, MD, KY, TN, VA, and WV. We have cultivated the deepest-reaching platform to connect nationwide investment to boots-on-the-ground-leadership throughout one of the most challenging places to serve in the country, resulting in place-informed and people-responsive solutions.
What it reported doing in 2024
Home lending - jcl is a full-service mortgage lender that strengthens communities by creating successful homeowners. Justchoice was the first nonprofit third party originator for freedom and has been instrumental in creating a national nonprofit packaging system for usda rural development 502 direct loans. Jcl is a fannie/freddie seller/servicer as well allowing rural regions to access capital that could be unavailable from other lenders.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 62% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 61% for direct work, and 39% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and liabilities are high compared with assets.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 69
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 75
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 56.3%; rating input score 56
- Program expense ratio: 92%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: $25.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 92.5%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 39.8%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.77; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.63; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 6 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 56.3% of revenue deployed · 92% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $21.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $301K · 28 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $239K reported
- Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 103 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 38 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.
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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.