Lutheran Social Services Housing Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262358686
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Fargo, ND, USA
Phone
7012713207
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,441,224
Expenses
$6,686,003
Assets
$61,970,558
Liabilities
$50,287,465

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KRIS FEHR (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JESSICA THOMASSON (CEO - LSSND)
  • PAULETTE PAULSON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JESSICA THOMASSON (CEO - LSSND): $162,884 total reported compensation
  • PAULETTE PAULSON (PRESIDENT): $92,524 total reported compensation
  • KARA WINKELMAN (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE - LSSND): $85,534 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Lss housing will support the continued vitality of North Dakota communities by providing housing and housing-related services.

What it reported doing in 2018

Affordable housing* (note: lssnd's housing work is carried out through a subsidiary, lutheran social services housing, inc.)*housing development - lssnd works with local leaders to identify critical community needs and then identify approaches for meeting them that have the best chance for success. To address shortages, we create partnerships to build and renovate to provide new, affordable housing. *preservation of affordable housing - lssnd works with communities and local partners to acquire, rehabilitate and, ultimately, preserve existing affordable housing units in rural North Dakota communities. *property management - we manage the affordable multi-family housing portfolio owned by lssnd, as well as units owned by other organizations and individuals around the state. The property management team is committed to being both compassionate and competent, offering day-to-day on-site management while also addressing individual tenant needs. 1,741 people lived in homes managed by lutheran social services

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 89% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.4%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -22.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.27; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.81; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.7M reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2009 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 25 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.