Neighborhood Housing Services of Chicago Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237443009
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
7738950750
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,947,806
Expenses
$6,697,614
Assets
$12,038,349
Liabilities
$13,253,391

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANTHONY SIMPKINS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANTHONY SIMPKINS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $238,561 total reported compensation
  • DONNA CLARKE (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $167,662 total reported compensation
  • TOM SAKOS (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $161,108 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Nhs' mission is to create opportunities for people to live in affordable homes, improve their lives, and strengthen their neighborhoods. Nhs deploys a suite of products, services, and strategies to fulfill its mission, primarily including:(i) educating and preparing new homeowners for success, and sustaining homeownership through foreclosure intervention services, financial coaching, and educational workshops.(ii) connecting residents to available resources, such as home purchase and improvement loans, and public grant opportunities, to encourage the preservation, repair, and improvement of the supply of residential housing.(iii) developing and supporting resident leaders in targeted geographies.(iv) building powerful and enduring community partnerships with and between community residents, government, financial institutions and private sector partners, and other community-based partners.

What it reported doing in 2024

Neighborhood housing services of chicago, inc. (nhs) offers its products and services citywide in chicago, with neighborhood-based offices in auburn gresham and englewood; chicago lawn and gage park; north lawndale; roseland; and west humboldt park. Nhs also operates three place-based partnerships focused on special programs. Approximately 80 percent of nhs' clients are low- to moderate-income. Nhs' counseling and education services provided classroom education to potential homebuyers and in person pre-purchase counseling. These programs were offered to potential homebuyers through nhs free 8-hour homebuyer curriculum (offered both in english and spanish weekly) and online via ehome america; providing individual counseling and intervention services to homeowners at risk of foreclosure. Nhs' executive management team and the innovation, evaluation and public policy department work across nhs' business lines to craft new solutions to the ever-changing issues facing underinvested neighborhoods and low and moderate income communities in the chicago region. Nhs partners and staff are pioneering efforts to respond to neighborhood and regional issues and to anticipate future needs for nhs' target neighborhoods and customers. Nhs converts the knowledge and experience gained through its daily work in the neighborhoods to new programs and public policy initiatives that can directly benefit those communities and the chicago region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 80% for direct work, and 20% for grants.

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.9%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 52.9%; rating input score 53
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 25.1%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.8; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.1; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.9% of revenue deployed · 52.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $239K · 20 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $606K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.