National Church Residences Development Services
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 263866414
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Columbus, OH, USA
- Phone
- 6144512151
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $496,253
- Expenses
- $480,987
- Assets
- $263,882
- Liabilities
- $949,019
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MATTHEW RULE (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT)
- SONYA BROWN (DIRECTOR, VICE PRESIDENT)
- ERIC WALKER (VICE PRESIDENT)
- SEAN ALEXANDER (VICE PRESIDENT, CFO)
- ROBERT WALTER (FORMER VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MATTHEW RULE (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT): $578,999 total reported compensation
- JULIE WOOLLEY (SECRETARY): $489,646 total reported compensation
- SONYA BROWN (DIRECTOR, VICE PRESIDENT): $482,173 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services, and communities for seniors.
What it reported doing in 2024
The sole purpose is to provide subsidized low and moderate-income apartment rental housing for primary elderly persons through the u.s. Department of hud sections 202 and 8 programs.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 99% 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 23
- Sustainability: 30
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.3%; rating input score 96
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.1%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 3.6; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 46.7%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 27.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 30.1% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 96.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $481K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $579K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 250 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.
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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.