Iccf Community Homes

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381903026
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Phone
6163369333
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,525,044
Expenses
$6,586,397
Assets
$63,937,468
Liabilities
$33,218,603

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RYAN VERWYS (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • RYAN VERWYS (CEO): $141,341 total reported compensation
  • MOLLY P PETERSEN (VP OF FINANCE): $103,343 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Equitable opportunity. Affordable homes. Thriving neighborhoods.

What it reported doing in 2024

Iccf's housing counseling program is certified by hud and the Michigan state housing development authority (mshda) and adheres to the national industry standards for housing counselors. In fy2024 160 households engaged with our resident programs. 448 individuals completed a homebuyer education series and 269 housing counseling clients were served. All clients are served regardless of income, race, color, religion/creed, sex, national origin, age, family status, disability, or sexual orientation/gender identity. Programs are administered in conformity with local, state, and federal anti-discrimination laws, including the federal fair housing act (42 usc 3600, et seq.)iccf offers two class series: introduction to homeownership and financial capabilities. Together these serve to equip prospective homebuyers or others who are working to achieve financial goals or affordable housing. Classes are taught by experts on iccf staff and offered in english and spanish. In addition, dedicated housing counseling and an individual development account (ida) down payment matching program are available for qualified clients. Through these programs, participants have the opportunity to improve their family and housing situations, and increase their opportunities in life.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.9%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 74.3%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.7%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.71; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.52; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.2%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.9% of revenue deployed · 74.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $141K · 18 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $244K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 27 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.

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

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.