Site K Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943132902
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4159891111
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$210,341
Expenses
$1,524,356
Assets
$107,867
Liabilities
$9,986,533

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES MATHER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KENNETH LOMBARD (PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA HLEBASKO (VICE PRESIDENT/SECRETARY)
  • SIERRA ATILANO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NATALIA WILLIAMS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SMITHA SESHADRI (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KENNETH LOMBARD (PRESIDENT): $1,112,594 total reported compensation
  • DELPHINE SHERMAN (EVP/SFO): $549,294 total reported compensation
  • SIERRA ATILANO (VICE PRESIDENT): $505,689 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Mission: this organization supports bridge housing corporation (bridge). Bridge strengthens communities by developing, owning and managing high-quality, affordable homes for working families and seniors.vision:* bridge strengthens communities and creates opportunities for working families and seniors, beginning but not ending with housing.* bridge is a leader and innovator in the mission-driven business of effective production, operation and ownership of affordable and mixed-income housing.* bridge earns the highest degree of customer satisfaction from all stakeholders, including residents, neighbors, investors, taxpayers, private- and public-sector partners, and employees.* bridge is the go-to developer and owner for public officials, investors and communities seeking an array of housing solutions, and it delivers results.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization is the general partner in partnerships that own and operate affordable housing projects for low-income persons.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 2
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.9%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -624.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.07; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 92.58; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.1%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 228 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.