Millennium Housing Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391904367
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Rockford, IL, USA
Phone
8153978827
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,931,325
Expenses
$6,375,119
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS VAN VLEET (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JACK AHRENS (DIRECTOR/VP/TREASURER)
  • THOMAS VAN VLEET (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN CONSTANTINE (DIRECTOR/SECRETARY)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization was formed for the purpose of preserving and developing decent, safe and affordable housing. The organization fulfills its mission through acquisition, rehabilitation and new development in urban and rural areas located in southeastern Wisconsin.

What it reported doing in 2018

Monroe plaza provides 197 low-income apartments to elderly and disabled tenants in green bay, Wisconsin and is subsidized by project funds served approximately 4,250 meals in 2018. The nursing program which is also subsidized by project funds covered approximately 175 hours of nursing care for tenants in 2018.fernwood court provides 121 low-income apartments to elderly and disabled tenants in milwaukee, Wisconsin and is subsidized by project funds served approximately 11,741 meals in 2018.rockland court provides 83 low-income apartments to families in fort atkinson, Wisconsin and is subsidized by governmental payments.spring glen provides 40 low-income apartments to elderly and disabled tenants in mayville, Wisconsin and is subsidized by governmental payments.oakwood provides 41 low-income apartments to elderly tenants in mequon, Wisconsin and is subsidized by governmental payments.cudahy provides 12 low-income apartments to elderly tenants in cudahy, Wisconsin and is subsidized by governmental payments.janesville i provides 19 low-income apartments to elderly tenants in janesville, Wisconsin and is subsidized by governmental payments.janesville ii provides 20 low-income apartments to elderly tenants in janesville, Wisconsin and is subsidized by governmental payments.villa st. Teresa provides 66 low-income apartments to elderly tenants in oshkosh, Wisconsin and is subsidized by governmental payments.teamster retiree housing of janesville provides 50 low-income apartments to elderly tenants in janesville, Wisconsin and is subsidized by governmental payments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 72% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 96
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 22nd 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -230.1%; rating input score 0; 0th 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: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2009 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 15 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 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.