Mutual Aid Twin Cities Housing Cooperative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
824467696
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
8154749961
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$258,627
Expenses
$44,987
Assets
$679,184
Liabilities
$408,024

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Miranda Herman-Crawford (Chair)
  • Elena Ornelas (Secretary)
  • Mira 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 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Charitable, Low-Income Housing

What it reported doing in 2021

MATCH provides low-income housing for individuals who are members of the cooperative.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 17.4%; rating input score 17
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 82.6%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.1; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.6; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 151.2% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 70.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 17.4% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $45K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 17/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.