House of Neighborly Service

Legal name: House of Neighborly Service of San Antonio Texas

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
741153442
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
San Antonio, TX, US
Phone
(210) 434-2301
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Neighborhood Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,034,669
Expenses
$1,761,105
Assets
$4,333,968
Liabilities
$553,091

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Eduardo Sesatty PhD (President)

People named in this filing

  • Eduardo Sesatty PhD (President)
  • Olivia Valdez (Treasurer)
  • Adela Garcia (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Our Mission is to provide opportunities that encourage, educate, and empower the families of our Westside community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Senior health program includes a nutrutious lunch for seniors 5 days a week. Activities are provided 3 days during the week which includes socialization, arts & crafts, diabetes, aerobic exercise, and health screening. Case management services are also provided to connect older adults to resources they may need to age in place gracefully. The goals is to improve both the physical and mental health of older adults. (286 senior served annually).

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.5%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 71.4%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.4%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.46; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 62.5% of revenue deployed · 71.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 47/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.