Slo Housing Connections

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471107729
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2017
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2016
Location
San Luis Obispo, CA, USA
Phone
8054406760
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Search Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$112,914
Expenses
$107,636
Assets
$10,085

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DEE TORRES (BOARD MEMBER)
  • STEPHANIE HANSEN (BOARD MEMBER)
  • ROBERT HELMS (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The slo housing connection's mission is to aid individuals who have exhausted standard available resources. Our goal is to provide shelter and support services as an avenue to self-sufficiency.

What it reported doing in 2017

SLO Housing Connection has successfully housed 55 chronically homeless and underserved individuals. We have successfully ensured that 51 individuals comprised of 35 households stayed in their homes avoiding eviction. Since March 2015 our food program has served 479 men, women and children; over 8,000 meals at a cost of $217.82 with the help of the Food Bank.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.3%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.7%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.09; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 55% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.4% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -41.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $108K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.