Siouxland Habitat for Humanity
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 421388519
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Sioux City, IA, USA
- Phone
- 712.224.5110
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,886,220
- Expenses
- $989,020
- Assets
- $4,885,018
- Liabilities
- $165,737
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NAMON JONES (PRESIDENT)
- EMILY VONDRAK (PAST PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- SHAYLA BAKER (EXEC DIRECTOR): $86,750 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our Christian mission is to put God9s love into action, by bringing local families, individuals, businesses, and organizations together to build strength, stability, and self-reliance through shelter. Our Christian mission is to put God’s love into action, by bringing local families, individuals, businesses, and organizations together to build strength, stability, and self-reliance through shelter. Siouxland Habitat for Humanity, a 501(c)(3), was established in 1992. Since that time we have built or renovated nearly 90 homes. We believe in setting up our partner family homeowners for success. This begins with our philosophy of providing a hand up not a handout and providing solid educational tools.
What it reported doing in 2024
Construction of and sale of affordable homes to low-income families. Providing mortgages with no interest for families who purchase homes.
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 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.
- 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 80
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 41.9%; rating input score 42
- Program expense ratio: 79%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $29.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 47.6%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.94; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 41.9% of revenue deployed · 79% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $782K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $87K · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.