Homes on Wheels Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831688307
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Pahrump, NV, USA
Phone
7757648115
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$288,529
Expenses
$381,143
Assets
$136,818
Liabilities
$390

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JD McCrary (Executive Director from Feb 2024)
  • Suanne Carlson (Vice President)
  • Robert Wells (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JD McCrary (Executive Director from Feb 2024): $75,846 total reported compensation
  • Phyllis Bickford (Assistant Director & Trustee): $30,800 total reported compensation
  • Suanne Carlson (Vice President): $17 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide safe and secure unconventional housing to those in need.

What it reported doing in 2024

Homes on Wheels Alliance (HOWA) serves the mobile community by helping our nomadic clients to improve their vehicles to be safe and functional homes and by creating gatherings for those who travel to become a supportive community for each other. For those in the nomadic community with low income, HOWA provides items such as portable solar-electric power systems and cold-weather gear. HOWA also provides funding for emergency repairs and other unforeseen critical needs for those living on the road. Gatherings for the mobile community include opportunities to recreationally camp together on public land, and a large winter gathering in the desert Southwest with classes, music, and opportunities for impromptu activities among attendees. When not in the same location, HOWAs participants learn, share, and support each other online via Zoom and Facebook.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 80% for direct work, and 20% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.4%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 74.1%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 63.6%; rating input score 64; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -32.1%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.6% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.4% of revenue deployed · 74.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $282K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $76K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.