Housing Assistance Office Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351327581
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Mishawaka, IN, USA
Phone
5742569444
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$538,146
Expenses
$568,679
Assets
$2,355,828
Liabilities
$490,417

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JANEEN CONBOY (DIRECTOR): $47,491 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 be an advocate and regional provider for safe, affordable housing and support programs that enhance the quality of life for the people we serve.

What it reported doing in 2024

The hao owns and manages rental housing projects at five different locations in rural st. Joseph county. These projects are located in new carlisle, north liberty, lakeville and walkerton, Indiana. The projects provide safe, sanitary, and affordable housing to low and moderate low income individuals. Due to the fact that these projects all have some type of government funding involved, the hao is obligated to keep the projects affordable based on the standards of the funding organization. Tenants' income is verified annually in order to stay in compliance. As of september 30, 2025 there were 74 residential units.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 70% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.9%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.14; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.4%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.9% of revenue deployed · 87% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $495K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $47K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.