Gwinnett Housing Resource Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582055819
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Duluth, GA, USA
Phone
6788084477
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Homeowners & Tenants Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$596,755
Expenses
$515,000
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Thomas Merkel (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Thomas Merkel (President & CEO): $31,252 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide decent, affordable housing for low and moderate income people and to promote fair housing and non-discriminatory practices in Gwinnett County, Georgia.

What it reported doing in 2016

Provided low cost housing and intensive case management to families with children. The program is designed to give homeless families the skills, financial knowledge, and time needed to regain permanent housing and self-sufficiency. Number of clients served in 2016 was 235 (adults and children).Provides free counseling and education to families seeking to buy or keep a home of their own. Staffed by professionally trained housing counselors, the center helps guide clients through the homeownership process and gives them the education to sustain their home investment through difficult times. Provided down payment assistance to 10 families.

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 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.
  • 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 73
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.6%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 69.8%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.7%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.1%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -28.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.6% of revenue deployed · 69.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $359K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $31K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.