Mount Washington Valley Habitat for Humanity

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
020463831
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
North Conway, NH, USA
Phone
6033563832
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,632,301
Expenses
$86,800
Assets
$2,924,511
Liabilities
$5,365

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BARBARA REILLY (PRESIDENT)
  • ANTHONY RUDDY (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BARBARA REILLY (PRESIDENT)
  • ANTHONY RUDDY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CATHERINE MCDONALD (TREASURER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization builds homes for lower income families in and around the mount Washington valley of northern New Hampshire and western Maine in order to allow families willing to commit to helping build such housing and turn their "sweat equity" into a permanent dwelling.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization builds homes for lower income families through the labor of the volunteers and future homeowners. The organization also provides interest free mortgages to the same families in order to make their efforts in home ownership a reality.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 15
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 94
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0.7%; rating input score 1
  • Program expense ratio: 13.4%; rating input score 13
  • Fundraising efficiency: $268.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 94.7%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 33.69; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0.7% of revenue deployed · 13.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 1/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.