Orange County Housing Trust Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271364961
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Orange, CA, USA
Phone
7144901250
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Expense Reduction Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$248,050
Expenses
$102,058
Assets
$7,903,129
Liabilities
$2,877

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HELEN O'SULLIVAN (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • HELEN O'SULLIVAN (PRESIDENT/CEO): $219,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The corporation's purpose is to finance organizations who create work force and affordable housing options for very low-to moderate-income individuals and families and special needs populations in orange county, California, to be a resource for individuals and entities involved in the creation of affordable and work force housing and to carry on other charitable and educational activities associated with these purposes.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ocht has been providing loans to continue facilitating the construction of the new affordable housing units in orange county, California. Over the past three years, ocht has provided construction loans with jamboree housing in two projects, la palma and manchester, for total $3.5 million. Additionally, ocht has provided a construction loan of $2 million to the salvation army.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 80% 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

MIXED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 21.8%; rating input score 22
  • Program expense ratio: 53%; rating input score 53
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 58.9%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 77.44; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 21.8% of revenue deployed · 53% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $54K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $220K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 22/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.