Affordable Homes & Communities

Legal name: Lee Gardens Housing Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541516042
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Arlington, VA, US
Phone
703-486-0626
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,041,267
Expenses
$2,149,157
Assets
$41,308,697
Liabilities
$22,622,109

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAUL BERNARD (PRESIDENT)
  • KENNETH CRAWFORD (VICE PRESIDENT (PART YEAR))
  • WALTER WEBDALE (FORMER PRESIDENT)
  • ALAN GOLDSTEIN (FORMER VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAUL BERNARD (PRESIDENT): $397,149 total reported compensation
  • KENNETH CRAWFORD (VICE PRESIDENT (PART YEAR)): $339,778 total reported compensation
  • ALAN GOLDSTEIN (FORMER VICE PRESIDENT): $304,598 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 create opportunities for residents to live, work, and contribute locally — strengthening the economic fabric of the region.

What it reported doing in 2024

Lee gardens housing corporation (lee gardens) provided 364 rental housing units for low/moderate income families through december 5, 2014, when the asset was sold to an affiliated entity. Lee gardens provided a seller take back note which matures december 4, 2044.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.9%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 96.4%; rating input score 96
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.3%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.22; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.55; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -18% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 67.9% of revenue deployed · 96.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $397K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $528K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 102 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.