Tcc Hill Country Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812751731
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5128549116
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,333,783
Expenses
$4,820,813
Assets
$1,794,602
Liabilities
$297,775

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDY BROWN (PRESIDENT)
  • MARGARET GOMEZ (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ANDY BROWN (PRESIDENT)
  • MARGARET GOMEZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JEFFREY TRAVILLION (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The corporation operates exclusively for the benefit of travis county, Texas, and its political subdivisions with the purpose of lessening the burdens of government, preventing community decay and reducing neighborhood tensions by assisting travis county, Texas, and its political subdivisions, including travis county housing finance corporation, to (i) provide decent, safe and sanitary housing at affordable prices for low and moderate income residents of travis county, Texas; (ii) promote certain economic development initiatives for the citizens of travis county, Texas; and (iii) otherwise carry out the purposes of the Texas housing finance corporations act.

What it reported doing in 2024

Tcc hill country development corporation is the sole member of over thirty general partner entities involved in partnerships actively developing, constructing and operating affordable housing apartment complexes in travis county, Texas during this fiscal year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 94% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.8%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -44.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $275K reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 42 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: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.