Rebuilding Together Peninsula

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943106209
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Redwood City, CA, USA
Phone
6503666597
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Home Improvement and Repairs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,887,966
Expenses
$3,353,393
Assets
$7,013,948
Liabilities
$555,504

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Melissa Lukin (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Melissa Lukin (Executive Director): $221,957 total reported compensation
  • Gregory Bernard (Director of Programs): $129,247 total reported compensation
  • Robert Skelton (Dir. of Marketing & Comm. Engagement): $114,257 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

RTP repairs homes, revitalizes communities, and rebuilds lives.

What it reported doing in 2024

[Re]build Days: RTP partners with community sponsors to provide larger, more complex repairs (fences, wheelchair ramp installations for elderly and disabled homeowners, major debris removal) in April and October for an average of 30 low-income homeowners and nonprofit agencies throughout San Mateo and Northern Santa Clara Counties. These repairs provide increased safety and health for hundreds of members of the community each year and are carried out with the support of over 770 volunteers annually.

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 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.6%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 75.3%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 13.7%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.09; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.6% of revenue deployed · 75.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $222K · 24 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $363K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.