Florida Non-profit Housing Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 591902966
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Sebring, FL, USA
- Phone
- 8633852519
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Search Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,077,747
- Expenses
- $2,310,490
- Assets
- $6,746,245
- Liabilities
- $168,679
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LUCIA VALDIVIA-SANCHEZ (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- STEVEN BROWN (EXECUTIVE DI): $166,544 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Florida non profit housing, inc.'s mission is to ensure the availability of decent, safe, and affordable housing for low to moderate income families and farmworkers in rural areas by providing technical assistance, education, training, and related affordable housing development and preservation services. In the past year, we received an increase in funding from the department of labor to expand our mission in support of low-income farmworkers.
What it reported doing in 2024
U.s. Department of labor migrant and seasonal farmworker program (1) provide technical assistance and training to community based organizations and local government in the deliverance of housing for farmworkers in the southeastern united states; (2) package applications to lenders for funding to construct housing for farmworkers; (3) provide temporary and emergency housing related services in the form of rental and utility payments; (4) provide financial literacy counseling; and (5) monitor sub-grantees for compliance with federal regulations. With our assistance, agencies have leveraged more than 133 million for nearly 3,000 rental housing units for farmworkers in the southeast.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some related-organization disclosures are missing and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 74
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65.1%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 24.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.92; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 65.1% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $167K · 10 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.