House to House Community Development

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273237405
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Montgomery, AL, USA
Phone
3346491534
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$205,653
Expenses
$150,757
Assets
$842,013
Liabilities
$167,069

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES WILSON (PRESIDENT)
  • BEN BLANCHARD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CORNELIUS JACKSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CORNELIUS JACKSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $31,250 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

House to house is tranforming the Washington park neighborhood in montgomery, al by strengthening families in the neighborhood through intentional christian discipleship, which is facilitated by living in a christian community and participating in neighborhood redevelopment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Redevelopment activities: the acquisition and renovation of single- family and residences and rental property management of renovated residences by house to house, the financial education of potential and active tenants, and ultimately facilitating home purchases for community members. These activities are designed to strengthen community pride and increase property values in the community in the long term.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.04 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 26.7%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.59; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.7%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.4% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $123K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $31K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.