Shelter Providers of Sacramento Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680391843
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Roseville, CA, USA
Phone
9167512746
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$642,510
Expenses
$669,288
Assets
$2,128,623
Liabilities
$147,321

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMBER CELMER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMBER CELMER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $136,056 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Homeaid recruits professionals from the building industry to facilitate and assist in the construction or rehabilitation of dignified housing where homeless families and individuals can rebuild their lives. Homeaid solicits, coordinates and tracks donations of labor and building materials donated from the building industry for specific projects brought to us by area homeless shelter partners. Homeaid also identifies area builders to serve as builder captains for each of the projects approved by the homeaid board of directors. The builder captains ensure that the quality of the work being done by our volunteers and businesses contributing to each project complies with building codes and standards.

What it reported doing in 2024

Homeaid provides on-going outreach and communication regarding our services and accomplishments to businesses, builders, and potential donors. The purpose of our communication via our website, monthly newsletter, e-news, facebook, and presentations is to underscore the importance of the home building industry's role in addressing the housing of homeless in our community. Homeaid seeks to keep in the forefront the fact that homeless shelters do not have the funding, resources, or expertise necessary to support remodeling and building projects needed to provide housing and shelter for homeless veterans, families, children and individuals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.5%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 64.9%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 38.3%; rating input score 38; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: -4.2%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.18; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.3%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.5% of revenue deployed · 64.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $434K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $136K · 22 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 38/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.