Lennar Charitable Housing Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912157016
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Irvine, CA, USA
Phone
9493498000
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$559,245
Expenses
$459,797
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jon Jaffe (Director/CEO)

People named in this filing

  • Jon Jaffe (Director/CEO)
  • Michael P White (Director/CFO/Se)
  • Trudie Wilson (Director/Ass.Se)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Lennar Charitable Housing Foundation ("Foundation") provided support to other charities that serve the homeless, transitionally homeless and working, low-income families and individuals. At the close of business on December 13, 2017, the Foundation's assets and liabilities were transferred to Home(ful) Foundtion, another 501(c)(3) charitable organization in California which shares the same mission. As such Lennar Charitable Housing Foundation continues to operate as a division of Home(ful) Foundation to provide shelters and shelter relted services to the homeless.

What it reported doing in 2017

Building Fund - Charities are selected and approved each year subject to available funding. Funds are used by the selected charities for direct or indirect building costs (construction related activities).Total amount granted since 2007 to 12/31/2017: $878,822 of which $18,022.00 were used to renovate Bakersfield Homeless Center, $125,000.00 were for the build of the Sacramento Senior Safe House, $75,000.00 granted to Orange County Rescue Mission for the Village of Hope Children's Dream Center to construct the play areas, reading areas, computer lab spaces, performance stage and the infant room, $185,000.00 to Mercy House, $300,000.00 to Mission Solano, 135,000.00 to Upward Bound House to help these charitable organizations build shelters, meeting part of the total build costs, $15,800 to Casa Teresa to support the safe housing program and $25,000 to Illumination Foundation to provide stable housing to 64 families comprised of 100 adults and 154 children.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.3%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 67.4%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.3% of revenue deployed · 67.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $310K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 17 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.