Housing Counseling Services

Legal name: Housing Counseling Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
520958568
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
202-667-7006
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$31,481,124
Expenses
$31,760,760
Assets
$5,733,056
Liabilities
$2,151,450

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARGARITA DILONE (PRESIDENT)
  • ERIC ROME (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARIAN SIEGEL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARIAN SIEGEL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $219,699 total reported compensation
  • SARAH T HILL (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $209,299 total reported compensation
  • OSCAR MITCHELL (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $176,880 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 comprehensive housing counseling, training, advocacy, and technical assistance for low- and moderate-income homebuyers, homeowners, tenants, and the homeless to help them achieve successful living in healthy, safe, and affordable homes.

What it reported doing in 2024

Home purchase and home ownership preservation: hcs increases the number of low- and moderate-income homeowners in the d.c. Area by providing counseling and training to educate clients about their housing options. This education helps to reduce the purchase barriers such as poor credit, lack of savings, and understanding mortgage loan products. Clients are taught about the home buying process, budgeting, down payment and first time homebuyer programs. To support enduring homeownership, hcs supports homeowners at risk of foreclosure by providing counseling, legal referrals and other interventions. Hcs prepares over 2,700 families for homeownership.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 60% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.5%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 97.7%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4,088.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.9%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.8%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 98.5% of revenue deployed · 97.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $31M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $220K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $744K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.