Housing Forward

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363876660
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Maywood, IL, USA
Phone
7083381724
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing, Shelter N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$19,214,417
Expenses
$19,321,310
Assets
$21,489,174
Liabilities
$18,945,181

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVEN GLASS (PRESIDENT)
  • CAMILE LINDSAY-KUMI (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DESTINY WOODS (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LYNDA SCHUELER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • LYNDA SCHUELER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $286,358 total reported compensation
  • MISTI FAUST (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $157,505 total reported compensation
  • ARMANDO SMITH (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER): $133,292 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Housing forward's mission is to transition people from housing crisis to housing stability.

What it reported doing in 2024

Diversion and outreach: diversion and street outreach connect with individuals who are unsheltered or precariously housed. Flexible financial assistance provides creative solutions for helping some stay housed or to relocate with friends or family. A four-person street outreach team engage with persons who are living on the streets or other places not meant for human habitation to provide basic needs, assess for housing and work with the coordinated entry system to connect them to a permanent housing situation. In 2024, 440 individuals received services through street outreach and 294 individuals received services through diversion.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 80% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 47% for direct work, and 53% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.8%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 75.4%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 38th 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: -0.6%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.11; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.88; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31.3% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.8% of revenue deployed · 75.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $14.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $286K · 28 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $108K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.