Homefree USA Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521885132
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Landover, MD, USA
Phone
3018918400
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,298,683
Expenses
$11,024,321
Assets
$12,198,740
Liabilities
$8,966,292

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Marcia Griffin (President & CEO)
  • James Griffin (Executive Vice President)
  • Milan Griffin (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Marcia Griffin (President & CEO): $374,328 total reported compensation
  • James Griffin (Executive Vice President): $281,410 total reported compensation
  • Milan Griffin (Vice President): $128,660 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Homefree USA, Inc. was organized under the laws of the State of Maryland in 1994. HFUSA is non profit 501 (C) (3) organization. The organization specializes in homeownership development foreclosure intervention and financial empowerment. It empowers minorities and women to attain and/or maintain home ownership and financial stability, with a focus on providing the financial tools needed to facilitate wise and cautious decision making. The organization is one of the leaders in accessing untapped mainstream financial resources and delivering them to individuals, families and communities. Major programs include: Housing Counseling and moving low and moderate income families to owned and rental housing.

What it reported doing in 2024

CFA program to provide counseling and career endeavoring services to college students attending HBCU's. The goal of the program is to train and prepare college students to major in all disciplines related to mortgage lending, real estate and property ownership and management. There are approximately 10 colleges participating in this program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 79% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 54
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.6%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 63.5%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 98.9%; rating input score 99; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 53.3%; rating input score 53; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 2.4%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.11; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.74; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.6% of revenue deployed · 63.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $374K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 53 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 41 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.