Fuller Center for Housing of Cache Valley Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 710966469
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2019, Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Logan, UT, USA
- Phone
- 4357522786
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $189,605
- Expenses
- $291,487
- Assets
- $252,752
- Liabilities
- $902
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RANDY WATTS (President)
People named in this filing
- RANDY WATTS (President)
- JOHN RICKETTS (BOARD MEMBER)
- TODD COTTLE (Executive Dir.)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To witness to and implement the Gospel of Jesus Christ in Utah and throughout the United States and the world by working with economically disadvantaged people to help them to create a better human habitat for economically disadvantaged people; and to communicate the Gospel of Jesus Christ by means of the spoken and written word and loving acts; and to support The Fuller Center for Housing, Inc., its Covenant Partners, and other charitable organizations which are working to develop better living conditions for economically disadvantaged people; and to receive, maintain, and accept as assets of the corporation any property, whether real, personal, or mixed, by way of gift, bequest., devise, or purchase from any person, firm trust, or corporation, and be held, administered, and disposed of exclusively for charitable, religious, educational, and scientific purposes within the meaning of Section 501 ( c )(3) or the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and in accordance with and pursuant to t
What it reported doing in 2024
The most meaningful outcome of this transition has been the number of neighbors we are now able to serve through our critical home repairs that protect health and safety, preserve housing stability, and strengthen the community. Using the same qualification model established by Habitat for Humanity, we can focus on resources where they are needed most. For example, we completed a complex roof repair on a mobile home just in time for winter. After years of leaks, extensive water damage had affected walls and floors, and in some areas, the subfloor had worn away to the point that it felt unsafe to walk on. The work required removing and replacing rusted sections, reinforcing trusses and wall connections with new braces and beams, adding insulation, and sealing the roof with a welded membrane. Heating remains one of the most urgent needs we see; furnace repairs and replacements are often the single most sought-after improvement for a familys safety and comfort. We also help homeowners protect and preserve older housing. Such as an 1890s home where damaged exterior siding had to be repaired and replaced before applying a high-quality exterior paint system to prevent further deterioration.There are occasions when I have helped a family with utility bills. Even though this is outside our stated mission, I feel a strong compulsion to help in these situations. There are several other non-profit groups that offer utility assistance, but they dont always have enough for everyone. I have used our funds only as a last resort. It wasnt long ago that I needed assistance with a power bill. The feeling of having your house go dark leaves a lasting impression.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 25
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 69.3%; rating input score 69
- Program expense ratio: 45.1%; rating input score 45
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -53.7%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 17.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 69.3% of revenue deployed · 45.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $131K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.