Mission First Housing Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271824650
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2155578484
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,581,287
Expenses
$4,966,960
Assets
$77,663,662
Liabilities
$15,518,685

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS AK QUEENAN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • CHIP DARLING (VICE PRESIDENT & COO)
  • MARK DEITCHER (VICE PRESIDENT & CFO)

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS AK QUEENAN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $338,933 total reported compensation
  • SARAH S CONSTANT (SENIOR VP, REAL ESTATE DEV): $282,916 total reported compensation
  • MARK DEITCHER (VICE PRESIDENT & CFO): $253,348 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mfhdc is a not-for-profit organization established for the purpose of developing affordable, safe and sustainable housing for people in need with a focus on the vulnerable. Development includes acquisition, rehabilitation, preservation and new construction across the mid-atlantic region.

What it reported doing in 2024

Real estate investment and development - development and construction of decent, safe, and permanent independent housing for individuals limited by serious, long-term, and/or chronic disability or homelessness.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 77% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

MIXED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 25
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 12%; rating input score 12
  • Program expense ratio: 55.5%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 77%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.64; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 12% of revenue deployed · 55.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $339K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors 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: 92 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 12/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.