Habitat for Humanity International Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421360275
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Newton, IA, USA
Phone
6417929786
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$82,669
Expenses
$55,987
Assets
$632,887
Liabilities
$7,701

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Build affordable homes for low income

What it reported doing in 2011

Affordable Housing Issues: Building House In Mingo, IA for Family of 5 Construction In Progress - Not Completed or sold as of 6/30/12

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 32.3%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.3; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.3%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 73.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $36K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $13K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.