Mission First Housing Group Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 455470563
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
- Location
- Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Phone
- 2155578414
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $628,125
- Expenses
- $1,716,179
- Assets
- $5,935,542
- Liabilities
- $9,124,784
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- THOMAS AK QUEENAN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- CHIP DARLING (VICE PRESIDENT & COO)
- MARK DEITCHER (VICE PRESIDENT & CFO)
- ROBERT KWAIT (VICE PRESIDENT & ASSISTANT SECRETARY)
Highest reported compensation
- THOMAS AK QUEENAN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $338,933 total reported compensation
- SARAH CONSTANT (SENIOR VP REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT): $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
Mission first housing group's mission is to develop and manage affordable, safe and sustainable homes for people in need, with a focus on the vulnerable. We ensure our residents have access to resources to help them live independently. We deliver housing that provides long-term benefits to residents and neighborhoods, alike.
What it reported doing in 2024
Through corporate, foundation and individual giving, mfhg finances rental subsidies in addition to cost associated with community and resident services provided with mfhg's residential portfolio.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 61
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 69.6%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $18.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd 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; 63rd 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: -173.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.46; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.54; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 27.5% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 31.6% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 69.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $339K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 112 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.