Providence Housing Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223311544
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
Phone
5855299555
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,681,706
Expenses
$6,094,415
Assets
$14,813,139
Liabilities
$2,875,447

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Fr Joseph Hart (President)
  • Mark Greisberger (Executive Director)
  • Helen Bianchi (Vice President of Property)

Highest reported compensation

  • Daniel Sturgis (Chief Financial Officer): $161,123 total reported compensation
  • Helen Bianchi (Vice President of Property): $159,974 total reported compensation
  • Mark Greisberger (Executive Director): $68,690 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Providence Housing Development Corporation's mission is to strengthen families and communities by creating and providing access to quality affordable housing enriched by the availability of supportive services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Homeless Grants, Providence administers 3 permanent supportive housing grant programs funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The programs served over 250 households during the year, providing affordable rental housing with supportive services to formerly homeless individuals and families. In addition to being homeless, each household has at least one family member who has a qualifying disability; such as mental health, physical disabilities, HIV/AIDs and/or addiction. These programs seek to provide individuals and their families with the opportunity to live independently, while receiving needed support services. (Continued on Schedule O)Providence was awarded a multi-year grant by Monroe County funded by the American Rescue Plan Act. The grant will be used to assist victims of domestic violence locate new housing and corresponding support services. In 2024, over 100 households received assistance.

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 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th 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: 20.7%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.43; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.4% of revenue deployed · 87% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $161K · 15 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $192K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 55 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.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.