Homeownership Council of America

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870798977
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
8002752209
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Financial Counseling

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,136,261
Expenses
$940,856
Assets
$1,131,617
Liabilities
$8,486

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GABRIEL G EWING DEL RIO (President CEO)
  • JENNIFER MURPHY (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • GABRIEL G EWING DEL RIO (President CEO): $204,869 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER MURPHY (Vice President): $102,283 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We work to ensure that Americas consumers have access to the programs and products that overcome traditional barriers to credit, affordability, and the opportunity to achieve homeownership.

What it reported doing in 2025

CLIMB: Community Lending Initiatives in Mortgage Banking is a technical assistance and capacity building service for CDFIs, lenders and HUD-approved housing counseling organizations that work in home- ownership services for low income populations. HCA provides specialized services and industry experience to each organizations leadership to support sustainable lending products, partnerships, and delivery systems that increase access to credit and lending for underserved homebuyers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 26
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.2%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 79.9%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd 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: 91%; rating input score 91; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 17.2%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.6%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.2% of revenue deployed · 79.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $752K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $205K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • 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.