Milpitas Housing Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 943253389
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4159891111
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Development, Construction, Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $957,891
- Expenses
- $891,823
- Assets
- $891,723
- Liabilities
- $16,726,304
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAMES MATHER (VICE PRESIDENT)
- KENNETH LOMBARD (PRESIDENT)
- REBECCA HLEBASKO (VICE PRESIDENT/SECRETARY)
- SIERRA ATILANO (VICE PRESIDENT)
- NATALIA WILLIAMS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- SMITHA SESHADRI (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- KENNETH LOMBARD (PRESIDENT): $1,112,594 total reported compensation
- DELPHINE SHERMAN (EVP/CFO): $549,294 total reported compensation
- SIERRA ATILANO (VICE PRESIDENT): $505,689 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mission: this organization supports bridge housing corporation (bridge). Bridge strengthens communities by developing, owning and managing high-quality, affordable homes for working families and seniors.vision:* bridge strengthens communities and creates opportunities for working families and seniors, beginning but not ending with housing.* bridge is a leader and innovator in the mission-driven business of effective production, operation and ownership of affordable and mixed-income housing.* bridge earns the highest degree of customer satisfaction from all stakeholders, including residents, neighbors, investors, taxpayers, private- and public-sector partners, and employees.* bridge is the go-to developer and owner for public officials, investors and communities seeking an array of housing solutions, and it delivers results.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization is a general partner in a partnership that owns and operates an affordable housing project for low-income persons.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as 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: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 32
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 93.1%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- 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; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th 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: 6.9%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 18.76; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 61.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 93.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $892K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 228 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.