Shelter Now

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
923073909
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
9718653238
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$89,142
Expenses
$30,056
Assets
$88,139
Liabilities
$2,112

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Sean Green (Board Chair)
  • Thomas Hickey (Treasurer & Secretary)
  • Carol Turner (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Shelter Now empowers people with lived experience of houselessness through leadership development and policy advocacy. The organization advances equitable, community-driven solutions by supporting the Lived Experience Council and the Village Federation, elevating the voices of impacted individuals in local decision-making, and promoting safe, sustainable approaches to shelter. Shelter Now works to reduce homelessness in Multnomah County by increasing access to resources, expanding the village model, and helping unhoused individuals build community and drive positive change in the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Shelter Now advanced the Micro-Village Expansion Program (MVEP) to support the development, improvement, and expansion of micro-village shelter options in Portland. The program provided technical assistance, resident feedback facilitation, and advisory support to partner organizations and local agencies working to create safe, community-oriented alternative shelter sites. MVEP also gathered lived-experience input to inform design standards and operational practices, helping ensure new and existing villages reflect resident needs and promote stability. Through this work, the program contributed to the ongoing development of multiple micro-village projects across Multnomah County.

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 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 37
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 21.3%; rating input score 21
  • Program expense ratio: 63.1%; rating input score 63

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 66.3%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.93; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 21.3% of revenue deployed · 63.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $19K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 21/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.