Housing El Dorado

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460554966
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Placerville, CA, USA
Phone
9163809352
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Homeless Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$418,969
Expenses
$343,252
Assets
$279,843
Liabilities
$24,175

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Maureen Dion-Perry (President)
  • Frank Porter (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Nichole Pain (Executive Dir.): $70,825 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Create and promote affordable housing solutions and support services that nurture individuals and families while encouraging self-sufficiency on the Western Slope of El Dorado County.

What it reported doing in 2024

Successful launch of the Homelessness Prevention Program (HPP) - administered for the EDOK CoC for the entirety of El Dorado County. Funded the first 20 applications to the HPP, providing essential housing support for 14 clients, and ending homelessness for 6.Launched the Critical Mobile Home Repair project phases 2 (focus: seniors), and phase 3 (focus: families) providing critical repairs to extend the longevity of their mobile homes.Contracted with Anthem to provide Case Management services to Medi-CAL clients, and access additional funding for moving costs on their behalf.Served 566 clients in various programming capacities.HED experienced significant staffing changes, including loss of a key staff member (Asst. Program Coordinator), which ultimately resulted in growth for the organization.HED also hired a full-time case manager in order to fulfill the capacity requirements of the Anthem contract.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.1%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.82; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $264K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $71K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.