Habitat for Humanity of Huron Valley

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
382874694
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Phone
7346771558
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,976,390
Expenses
$7,423,248
Assets
$9,591,824
Liabilities
$2,751,342

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SARAH STANTON (CEO)
  • JEANNETTE JACKSON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SARAH STANTON (CEO): $198,685 total reported compensation
  • ROB NISSLY (CHIEF STRATE): $193,841 total reported compensation
  • RON THOMAS (CFO/COO): $193,756 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Habitat for humanity of huron valley exists to provide affordable housing to low-income individuals in the greater washtenaw county area.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community development - our community development activities include events in which hhhv helps create a benefit for an entire neighborhood. Activities include neighborhood association meetings, community planning meetings, door-to-door surveys, supporting resident-led action teams, neighborhood beautification days, neighborhood picnics, enhancing community amenities, and neighborhood school events. In particular, hhhv is currently partnering with residents in gault village, west willow and sugarbrook to make their communities even better places to live and work. While we have renovated more than 60 homes in these neighborhoods, we also provide support for community planning and organization work to enhance the positive impact of all of our programs. We offer these programs and activities in order to bring positive change to neighborhoods, making them more economically stable and improving the quality of life for residents. Volunteer engagement in fy25 hhhv engaged with 3483 volunteers for 16149 hours across all programs and committees. Hhhv utilizes a donor database to track these volunteers, and this number represents the total number of volunteer days multiplied by the volunteers which are present for each volunteer day. In this method a single volunteer will be counted for each event or day in which they were present. Transparency hhhv is committed to efficiency and transparency. We communicate with our supporters, donors and prospective donors by email, social media, postal mail, phone, and other means, both to request contributions to our cause and to educate the public about hhhv's year-round programs, volunteer opportunities and other events in our local communities, and around the world. These efforts help advance our mission by bringing people together to build homes, secure futures and strengthen communities. As a result, in accordance with financial accounting standards board (fasb) guidelines and internal revenue service guidance, hhhv allocates a portion of our fundraising costs to program services. As a nonprofit organization that is exempt from federal taxation, we ensure our donor's money is spent as efficiently and effectively as possible. Additionally, we have certain expenses that cannot be billed separately for each functional area. Rent, utilities, information technology and other costs are grouped together. We allocate these costs in compliance with generally accepted accounting principles, or gaap, across our programs (including restore), management and general, and fundraising categories. Finally, staff members have responsibilites that cross over functional areas, and these staff members' time is allocated across functional areas based on allocation tables by percentage of effort that are updated regularly.

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 66% for direct work, 34% for grants, and 0% for affiliated organizations.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.9%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.9%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.29; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.9% of revenue deployed · 84.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $6.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $199K · 19 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.