Habitat for Humanity of Ontario County New York Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161386125
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Canandaigua, NY, USA
Phone
5853963600
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$762,137
Expenses
$693,339
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIM GAYLORD (PRESIDENT)
  • RYAN HOOK (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOSHUA MILLER (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NASH BOCK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NASH BOCK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $42,738 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity of ontario county, ny, brings people together to build homes, communities and hope.

What it reported doing in 2022

Operating the organization's restore building in which donated materials and supplies are sold to homeowners and the public at discounted prices. Proceeds of the restore are used to fund the construction of new, affordable houses in ontario county, ny. The organization opened the restore facility in december 2010.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 78% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 18th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9%; rating input score 59; 59th 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: 6.2%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.6% of revenue deployed · 93% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $645K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $43K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2017 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.