Gwinnett County Habitat for Humanity In
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 581795694
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lawrenceville, GA, USA
- Phone
- 7709318080
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Development, Construction, Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,652,034
- Expenses
- $7,754,601
- Assets
- $9,861,929
- Liabilities
- $3,488,989
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHRIS R HERMANSEN (PRESIDENT)
- SEBASTIAN DAVIS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- ERIC MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- CHRIS R HERMANSEN (PRESIDENT)
- ANGIE TAYLOR (BOARD MEMBER)
- ASHLEY GOFF (TREASURER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities, and hope.
What it reported doing in 2024
Gwinnett county - wrap program. Started april 2022. Water resources assistance program (wrap) is a home repair ministry program offered through gwinnett/walton habitat for humanity in partnership with gwinnett county water resources department. Wrap provides plumbing services for low to moderate-income homeowners who reside within gwinnett county service area. Wrap assists homeowners who are unable to complete plumbing repairs on their own due to age, finances, or physical ability. Two hundred sixty projects were completed during the year ended june 30, 2025.
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 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 91
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 95.2%; rating input score 95
- Program expense ratio: 93.9%; rating input score 94
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 69.7%; rating input score 70; 18th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1.3%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.27; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 95.2% of revenue deployed · 93.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.