Habitat for Humanity International Sicangu Tikaga Okiciyapi Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460450137
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Mission, SD, USA
Phone
6058562665
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$133,453
Expenses
$154,037
Assets
$854,085
Liabilities
$180,904

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Construction of low income housing on the reservation.

What it reported doing in 2010

Construction of low income housing assisting people living on the rosebud reservation, and assisting with financing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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: 92
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -15.4%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.54; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -10.4% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $104K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $16K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.