Fleming Co Habitat for Humanity Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205337130
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Flemingsburg, KY, USA
Phone
6068453551
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$45,803
Expenses
$23,184
Assets
$209,756
Liabilities
$53,354

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAROLYN SCHWARTZ (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CAROLYN SCHWARTZ (PRESIDENT)
  • DON PETRI (VICE PRES)
  • AVA HINTON (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide affordable housing to community members

What it reported doing in 2015

Program is a home ownership program. The organization builds homes provided by donated items, donated labor, discounted costs, etc. The organization then sells its home to low income families that are qualified through a screening and selection process. The recipients must also donate hours on builds. To date, the organization has provided 6 homes that have provided affordable housing to 6 families. The homes are sold with no profit motive. The sale of homes provides funding for the next home build. At the end of year, the organization has a home build in process.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.2%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 95.2%; rating input score 95

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 49.4%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.05; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.2% of revenue deployed · 95.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $22K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.