Rhf Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912145934
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Long Beach, CA, USA
Phone
5622575100
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,472,532
Expenses
$4,824,073
Assets
$334,175,069
Liabilities
$78,501,678

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HARTMAN STUART J (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • HART DONALD G (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • HARTMAN STUART J (PRESIDENT/CEO): $770,133 total reported compensation
  • AMBERG ROBERT R (EXECUTIVE VP GEN COUNSEL): $530,647 total reported compensation
  • ROSSELLO FRANK JR (CFO AND VP OF FINANCE): $488,122 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide low and very low income housing development and resident benevolent care.

What it reported doing in 2024

Rhf foundation, inc., was established to hold certain trust funds on behalf of retirement housing foundation, a California nonprofit corporation. The trust funds were available to provide development and/or equity funds for new projects being developed to provide shelter and/or services for very low, low, and moderate income seniors; very low and low income families; and for very low and low income persons with disabilities.

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 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

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 15.8%; rating input score 16
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: 60%; rating input score 60; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 72.4%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 69.27; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.2%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 15.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $770K · 23 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 237 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.