Home Builders Association of Central Arizona
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 860114860
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2023
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, US
- Phone
- (602) 274-6545
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,556,892
- Expenses
- $2,206,361
- Assets
- $8,226,424
- Liabilities
- $252,504
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
23 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JACKSON MOLL (CEO)
- SPENCER KAMPS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- CONNIE WILHEM (FORMER CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JACKSON MOLL (CEO): $363,149 total reported compensation
- CONNIE WILHEM (FORMER CEO): $330,909 total reported compensation
- SPENCER KAMPS (VICE PRESIDENT): $322,936 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We are dedicated to continually strive to improve the overall experience and satisfaction of every member. The Association will take every opportunity to show our appreciation for your membership. We are committed to providing the best possible service, convenience, and value to you, our members, at all times through issue advocacy, continuous educational programs, and business development and networking opportunities. We understand that satisfied members are the reason and purpose of our Association. Providing excellent service to our members and acting with integrity is the standard by which we act.
What it reported doing in 2023
Additional programs include: 1) the labor, safety, and health program assists members with a broad range of construction safety issues 2) the in-house counsel and land developers counsel forums allows networking, education, and discussion of issues relevant to professionals within the home building industry 3) professional women in building is the voice of women in the building industry, dedicated to promoting industry professionalism and supporting members at local, state and national levels.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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.
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: 70
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 74
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 25th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 38%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.73; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 46.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $407K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $363K · 23 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2023
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.