Stansbury Homes Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521952714
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Timonium, MD, USA
- Phone
- 4107474492
- Rating
- 64
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing, Shelter N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $142,218
- Expenses
- $217,558
- Assets
- $487,987
- Liabilities
- $38,466
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DIANE MAISTROS (PRESIDENT)
- RICHARD BARR (VICE-PRESIDENT)
- ERINN SHAW (VICE-PRESIDENT THRU 11/24/24)
Highest reported compensation
- KELLY SAVOCA (SVP & CFO): $760,086 total reported compensation
- DIANE MAISTROS (PRESIDENT): $292,801 total reported compensation
- SARAH NORMAN (CHIEF, COMMUNITY DEV. THRU 8/18/24): $224,077 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide affordable housing to the chronically mentally disabled in accordance with the section 811 of the national affordable housing act.
What it reported doing in 2024
Stansbury homes, inc. Was organized in august 1993 under the provisions of the state of Maryland for the purpose of acquiring and constructing housing and related facilities for persons who suffer from mental illness. The entity was financed through the u.s. Department of housing and urban development ("hud") under section 811 of the national affordable housing act and consists of 15 units. Such projects are regulated by hud as to rent charges and operating methods.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 73% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 40
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 69.9%; rating input score 70
- 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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 11
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -53%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.24; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 65.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 69.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $152K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $760K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 11 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.
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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 8 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.