Neighborhood Housing Services of the Black Hills Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460423151
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2023
Location
Deadwood, SD, USA
Phone
6055781401
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,443,991
Expenses
$1,129,322
Assets
$5,590,157
Liabilities
$1,265,604

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERIC SWANSON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MIKE WALKER (EXECUTIVE DI): $97,853 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Assist in providing decent, safe, and affordable housing & revitalizing neighborhoods to improve the quality of life in our communities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Campaign for homeownership: under the umbrella of the campaign for homeownership, neighborhood housing services of the black hills, inc. Has implemented programs to remove barriers that prevent potential homebuyers from achieving homeownership, to maintain their home, and to stay in their home. Neighborhood housing services of the black hills, inc. Is certified as a hud counseling agency, certified as a community housing development organization with the state of South Dakota and has adopted the national industry standards for homeownership education and counseling. Homebuyer education: potential homebuyers are introduced to the home buying process and their part in it. Local professionals volunteer their time to offer training on budgeting, credit, types of loans, predatory lending, home inspections and roles of various housing partners. The class provides eight hours of intensive, interactive housing education. Homebuyer counseling: potential homebuyers receive one-on-one counseling regarding their specific financial situations. Counselors discuss the financing options, review credit, answer questions and determine a plan of action. Post-purchase education: post-purchase classes are hands on classes to assist new and existing homeowners in the maintenance of their home. Annual routine maintenance is discussed at each class, how to be a good neighbor and predatory lending is revisited. Foreclosure prevention counseling: homeowners receive one-on-one counseling to prevent foreclosure, assisting with budgeting and working with creditors. Clients receive complete foreclosure intervention and default counseling with mortgage mitigation assistance. Financial fitness education: potential and existing homeowners obtain financial literacy knowledge and skills in this credit counseling class. The class includes 12 hours of study on subjects including when to borrow, using credit cards, delinquencies, bankruptcies and maintaining good credit. The homeowners will leave with a personalized working budget for their household. Lending: in 2002, the organization formed a subsidiary, neighborhood lending services, llc to manage the growing loan fund portfolio. Neighborhood lending services, llc is certified as a community development financial institution (cdfi) by the u.s. Department of the treasury. Neighborhood lending services, llc maintains a revolving loan fund. The main focus of the revolving loan fund is to provide "down payment and closing costs" assistance for low- to moderate-income families and first time homebuyers. Other loan products include rehabilitation loans and participation loans with usda rural development. The organization is able to offer flexible lending products for low to moderate income families. Property management: neighborhood housing services of the black hills, inc. Owns two apartment buildings totaling 40 rental units.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 96
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.5%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 59.8%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 21.8%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.95; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.7%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.5% of revenue deployed · 59.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $675K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $98K · 13 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $373K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 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: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.