Keystone Housing Development Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 223864577
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Phone
- 2155578484
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $86,709
- Expenses
- $163,040
- Assets
- $465,051
- Liabilities
- $353,925
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KWAIT ROBERT (VICE PRESIDENT AND ASSISTANT SECRETARY)
- QUEENAN THOMAS (PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
- DARLING CHIP (VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER)
- DEITCHER MARK (VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN UNGER (CHAIRPERSON): $338,933 total reported compensation
- DEITCHER MARK (VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $253,348 total reported compensation
- QUEENAN THOMAS (PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $251,798 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Organized to acquire, rehabilitate, construct, own and operate affordable housing project in philadelphia for the purposes of providing low income, safe, affordable and permanent housing for the disabled as may be identified by federal, state or county officials.
What it reported doing in 2024
Established to provide disabled persons with housing facilities and services designed to meet their physical, social and psychological needs. During the year ended 06/30/2025, the organization provided 11 housing units to disabled persons.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 85
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 93.3%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 24th 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: -88%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.85; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.76; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 661.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $152K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $339K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 82 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.