Neighborhood Housing Partnership of Greater Springfield

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311385444
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Springfield, OH, USA
Phone
9373224623
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,231,241
Expenses
$1,052,861
Assets
$4,345,732
Liabilities
$2,195,629

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THERESA HARTLEY (PRESIDENT)
  • JACKIE FOLCK (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • GREG WOMACKS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THRU MAY))
  • RACHEL GOFF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUSAN JUDY (CONTROLLER): $99,897 total reported compensation
  • RACHEL GOFF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $95,286 total reported compensation
  • GREG WOMACKS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THRU MAY)): $49,956 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To create and preserve affordable, quality housing and strong neighborhoods through partnerships of residents, business, and government.

What it reported doing in 2025

Education & counseling: in 2025, 69 individuals completed our homebuyer education course. Additionally, 61 households received individual credit counseling and 321 households received streamlined homebuyer counseling under ohfa/hoepa guidelines. We had 1 foreclosure save. 41 individuals attended financial literacy workshops through our partnerships with clark county public library, united senior services, sunrise treatment center, project woman, and various schools.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 75% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.2%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.7%; rating input score 99; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 14.5%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.13; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.3%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.2% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $973K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 16 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $394K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.