Housing California Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 680133565
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Sacramento, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9164470503
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Homeless Centers
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,373,092
- Expenses
- $5,046,390
- Assets
- $10,015,234
- Liabilities
- $881,130
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KENDRA ROBERTS (PRESIDENT)
- CHIONE FLEGAL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- CHIONE FLEGAL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $241,628 total reported compensation
- JULIE LO (DEP. DIR. OF PROGRAMS): $183,826 total reported compensation
- ERIKA WHITCOMB (STRATEGIC INITIATIVES DIR.): $150,356 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization is based in sacramento, California, and brings together a diverse, cross-sector network to prevent and end homelessness, increase the supply of safe, stable, affordable homes, and protect low income renters.housing California works to: strengthen the capacity, alignment, and power of the housing and homelessness field; increase public understanding and support for housing solutions; and advance evidence-based policy change at the state level.
What it reported doing in 2025
See schedule o for a narrative of housing California's program service accomplishments.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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
STRONG - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some related-organization disclosures are missing.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 85
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 56.5%; rating input score 56
- Program expense ratio: 81.1%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $200.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 31.6%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.98; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 16.4%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 56.5% of revenue deployed · 81.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $242K · 25 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $225K reported
- Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 7 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.