Olympic Housing Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611497176
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Port Townsend, WA, USA
Phone
8326235841
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$923,782
Expenses
$240,898
Assets
$1,246,999
Liabilities
$18,676

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kathy Morgan (Executive Director)
  • Theodore Howard (President)
  • Sam Schroeder (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kathy Morgan (Executive Director): $82,218 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 develop and steward land for permanently affordable housing and related community needs on the North Olympic Peninsula.

What it reported doing in 2025

OHT's primary activity is affordable housing development. OHT is actively engaged in ongoing project management for two affordable housing construction projects: Dundee Hill, starting in 2025 and Chimacum Commons project started in 2023. Goals of project predevelopment are to design, plan, permit, fund, construct, and sell / rent homes to eligible households. Projects to be built by 2026 and 2027 respectively. OHT has ongoing stewardship activities regarding the four low-income households it serves currently. On an ongoing basis, these homeowners are supported with lease payment monitoring, support in maintenance questions, and resale questions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - 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: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 14.3%; rating input score 14
  • Program expense ratio: 54.5%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: $105.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 73.9%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.18; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.1%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 34% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 71.3% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 66.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 14.3% of revenue deployed · 54.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $131K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 8 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $198K reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 14/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.