Greater Minnesota Housing Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411836919
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Saint Paul, MN, US
Phone
651-221-1997
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$40,328,548
Expenses
$17,741,215
Assets
$302,777,264
Liabilities
$150,763,626

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREA BRENNAN (PRESIDENT/CEO BEGINNING)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREA BRENNAN (PRESIDENT/CEO BEGINNING): $400,864 total reported compensation
  • BARBARA SPORLEIN (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $322,969 total reported compensation
  • JOHN ERRIGO (MANAGING DIRECTOR OF EQUITY INVESTING): $292,281 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We support the development of strong communities and affordable homes for all Minnesotans through access to low-cost capital, effective partnerships, and innovative solutions to local housing needs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Affordable housing programs, planning and technical assistance: please see schedule o for the description of gmhf's affordable housing programs, planning and technical assistance.more than just a lender, greater Minnesota housing fund is known for its innovation and creative approaches to Minnesota's affordable housing challenges: grantmaking: gmhf awards grants to a variety of individuals and organizations across the state that advance the gmhf programs described below and for strategic and specialized opportunities such as affordable housing advocacy, legal services, tenant organizing, homebuyer and developer training, housing research, community-based planning, cross-sector collaboration, local planning, technical assistance, and other activities to advance the affordable housing agenda in Minnesota.programs and initiatives: gmhf implements a series of programs to promote best practices in the affordable housing field, including:(a) emerging developers program supports emerging developers in their growth as affordable housing developers by offering grant funding, technical assistance, and training;(b) housing & health equity initiative links healthcare organizations with the housing community to create investment and innovative housing solutions;(c) rural and tribal capacity building brings affordable housing from concept to completion in greater mn by offering technical assistance, planning support, and grants;(d) green lending initiative supports the electrification and decarbonization of existing and new affordable housing by leveraging local, state, and federal resources and offering technical assistance, resource matching, financing, and demonstration projects;(e) small noah program supports small and emerging landlords in acquiring and preserving naturally occurring affordable units throughout Minnesota's rural and urban areas.gmhf serves as fiscal sponsor for the heading home Minnesota funders collaborative whose purpose is to engage philanthropy in supporting state and local plans to end and prevent homelessness and greater production of permanent supportive housing with services.research and development: gmhf conducts research on best practices and strategies in affordable housing and develops demonstration projects, as well as pilot programs and initiatives that can be adopted and implemented statewide.

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 87% 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 37.6%; rating input score 38
  • Program expense ratio: 83%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.7%; rating input score 100; 36th 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: 56%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.07; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 37.6% of revenue deployed · 83% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $14.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $401K · 23 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 40 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 34 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.