Senior Citizens Housing Committee Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 112426215
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Greenlawn, NY, USA
- Phone
- 6312620101
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,394,651
- Expenses
- $1,538,378
- Assets
- $18,669,948
- Liabilities
- $14,499
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WILLIAM DAVIDSON (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- WILLIAM DAVIDSON (PRESIDENT): $274,604 total reported compensation
- JUDY FARABAUGH (CONTROLLER): $238,127 total reported compensation
- JEFFREY HARTMAN (VP OF ENGINE): $128,655 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Seeking, acquiring, renovating, managing and financing rental housing units for low income senior citizens as defined and approved under hud and/or lihtc guidelines to qualifiy for the hud hap subsidy.
What it reported doing in 2025
Seek out potential future locations, improve and update and manage low income senior citizens housing units of affiliates, acquire land, plan for low income housing credits and federal funding for construction and renovation of low income senior citizens housing units. Provide and manage senior services to the residents of the affiliated housing projects. In 2025, the organization provided a grant of 153,800 to paumanack village iv (h.s.c. No 4 housing development fund co, inc.) to replace the windows at the apartment housing complex. In 2025, the organization provided a grant of 325,397 to paumanack village v (h.s.c. No. 5 housing development fund co, inc.) to replace the gutters on the buildings and to replace the countertops in the apartment units of the housing complex. In 2025, the organization created a new company, schc senior services, llc which is wholly owned by senior citizens housing committee, inc. The organization provided a grant of 170,500 to fund the operations which is to provide support services to the senior citizen residents at the paumanack villages. The paumanack villages serve the low income elderly population and further the organization's mission of helping low income seniors.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 70% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 47
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 62
- Sustainability: 81
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 43.3%; rating input score 43
- Program expense ratio: 69.4%; rating input score 69
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 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: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 54.7%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.14; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 39.5%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 43.3% of revenue deployed · 69.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $275K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 13 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 43/100.
- Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.