Our Towns of North Mecklenburg - Iredell Habitat for Humanity

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561733643
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Davidson, NC, USA
Phone
7048968957
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,247,213
Expenses
$4,251,884
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRENDA SUITS (PRESIDENT)
  • MATTHEW BLICKLEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHRIS AHEARN (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRIS AHEARN (CEO): $126,825 total reported compensation
  • MIKE PRICE (VP OPERATIONS): $68,052 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To build decent, affordable housing in partnership with families in need.

What it reported doing in 2019

One way our towns habitat funds the mission of creating and preserving affordable housing is through the operation of restores--resale stores offering new and gently used furniture, home accessories, building materials and appliances at below-market prices. Our towns operates restores in cornelius, mooresville and statesville, nc.the stores generated funding for the construction of nearly homes locally and homes and healthy-home solutions for families in guatemala as part of habitat for humanity's global mission.during fy 2020, the organization merged with habitat of humanity of the charlotte region to continue fulfilling its exempt purpose.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 75% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 89.3%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 71st 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.1%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.6% of revenue deployed · 89.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $127K · 21 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $102K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.