San Diego Habitat for Humanity Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330259190
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6192834663
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,823,344
Expenses
$5,575,080
Assets
$19,721,482
Liabilities
$17,865,258

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KWOFI REED (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KWOFI REED (PRESIDENT & CEO): $191,815 total reported compensation
  • ANNE KILPATRICK (CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFIC): $158,482 total reported compensation
  • JONATHAN ATUN (CFO): $154,620 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Seeking to put god's love into action, san diego habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities, and hope.

What it reported doing in 2024

People in our community and all over the world partner with habitat for humanity to build or improve a place they can call home. Habitat homeowners help buld their own homes alongside volunteers and pay an affordable mortgage. With our help, habitat homeowners achieve the strength, stability, and independence they need to build a better life for themselves and their families. San diego habitat for humanity is the local, independent affilate of habitat for humanity international. We are governed, raise funds, and build locally in san diego county.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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 - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.8%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 58%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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: 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: 18.3%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.54; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.91; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.8% of revenue deployed · 58% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $192K · 16 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $912K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.