Louisville Metro Affordable Housing Trust Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274155836
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Louisville, KY, USA
Phone
5026375372
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,966,265
Expenses
$2,989,208
Assets
$10,738,725
Liabilities
$46,338

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRISTOPHER HARAGAN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRISTIE MCCRAVY (EXECUTIVE DI): $108,598 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The louisville affordable housing trust fund (lahtf) was created in 2008 as a way for metro council to invest public funds in the kind of housing our community needs: for people on fixed incomes like seniors and people with serious disabilities; for young families.

What it reported doing in 2019

The louisville affordable housing trust fund (lahtf) was created in 2008 as the way for metro council to invest public funds in the kind of housing our community needs: for people on fixed incomes like seniors and people with serious disabilities; for young families starting out; for veterans; and for working people whose wages are not enough to live in metro louisville. The housing trust fund is founded on the principle that a place to call home opens the door to opportunity, and that the whole community does better when everyone has a decent place to call home. The lahtf provides gap financing for developers creating or managing affordable housing units. Eligible uses of financing include property acquisition, construction financing or permanent financing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 95% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. 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: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 89
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.8%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 94.9%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $123.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 71st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 57.1%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.59; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.6%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 43% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 33.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31.3% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.8% of revenue deployed · 94.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $109K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2012 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.