National Campus and Community Development Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 204398263
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2011
- Location
- Austin, TX, United States
- Phone
- 512.322.9650
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $96,363,701
- Expenses
- $122,659,181
- Assets
- $1,119,212,324
- Liabilities
- $1,305,633,528
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHARLES GREG EDEN (PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- CAROLINE OAKES (VP & DIRECTOR OF OPERATION): $242,188 total reported compensation
- CHARLES GREG EDEN (PRESIDENT/CEO): $193,500 total reported compensation
- LIBBY SANTOS (DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION): $129,609 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our goals are to reduce the time, risk, and expense associated with public facilities development. Our tax-exempt financing solutions provide cost-effective, risk-free opportunities for essential infrastructure and facilities development. Mr. Eden was a founder of the Association for Governmental Leasing and Finance, an industry-leading organization that provides guidance to those actively engaged in the government and nonprofit leasing and financing. For the last thirty-five years Mr. Eden has served as an advisor, consultant, and developer of projects serving K-12 institutions, higher education, and state and local governments. In the course of this time period he has become nationally recognized as an expert on the subject of tax-exempt project finance. He is a graduate of Dartmouth College where he received an AB degree and the University of Virginia School of Law....
What it reported doing in 2024
Nccd is dedicated to helping build stronger communities through tax exempt and project financing for facilities development. Current projects include student housing, a university hotel, parking facilities, the expansion of a community college campus and a conference center.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 38
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 99.7%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 28th 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: -27.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.12; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.17; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.5%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 18.8% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 20.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $122.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $242K · 7 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $108.8M reported
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 16 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.