Hfh of Douglas County Minnesota Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411869669
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Alexandria, MN, USA
Phone
3207624255
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,165,881
Expenses
$3,404,354
Assets
$6,413,576
Liabilities
$1,989,889

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LORI ANDERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LORI ANDERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $117,699 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity bring people together to build homes, communities, and hope to realize our vision of a world where everyone has a decent place to live. Habitat for humanity of douglas county, Minnesota adheres to a strict non-proselytizing policy and will not offer assistance on the expressed or implied condition that people must adhere to or convert to a particular faith or listen and respond to messaging designed to induce conversation to a particular faith.

What it reported doing in 2024

Homeownership program: habitat partners with douglas county families to build and improve safe, affordable homes. Each home is designed to be modest in sizelarge enough to meet a family's needs while remaining affordable to build, purchase, and maintain. Affordability is achieved through volunteer and future homeowner labor, donated materials, energy-efficient building practices, and affordable mortgages. Access to homeownership is a powerful catalyst for change: stability, dignity, health, and opportunity all start with a home. People who purchase habitat homes can invest in their futures, improve educational outcomes, and strengthen our community for generations to come. In fy2025, habitat for humanity of douglas county served 6 households representing 23 individuals through our affordable homeownership program. Together, we build opportunity, community, and brighter futures.aging in place program: habitat partners with douglas county families and local organizations to help older adults remain safe and independent in their homes. Guided by habitat's housing plus strategy, this person-centered approach uses tailored assessments to address each homeowner's needsranging from mobility and accessibility to safety and comfort. By improving both the home and the homeowner's quality of life, we help ensure that aging in place is not only possible but sustainable. In fy2025, habitat for humanity of douglas county improved 25 homes representing 39 individuals through this program. Together, we build dignity, independence, and healthier communities.restore program: the restore is a nonprofit home improvement store and donation center that sells donated building material, furniture, and appliances at affordable prices. Profits directly support the construction of affordable housing and repairs in douglas county, ensuring more families have access to safe, affordable housing. The restore also reduces landfill waste by giving new life to quality, reusable items, while providing volunteer and employment opportunities. Together, we build sustainability, opportunity, and stronger communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. Liabilities are high compared with assets and the available information about grant readiness federal audit leaves an important question unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.2%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 95.7%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $27.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.3%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.2% of revenue deployed · 95.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $118K · 12 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $183K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.