Tchfh Lending Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811958719
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6512071700
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,251,491
Expenses
$4,659,990
Assets
$19,881,588
Liabilities
$8,480,041

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBYN BIPES-TIMM (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBYN BIPES-TIMM (PRESIDENT): $352,646 total reported compensation
  • BETSY MILLS (SECRETARY): $208,821 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of tchfh lending, inc. Is to help those underserved by the traditional mortgage industry attain homeownership through its affordable mortgage program.

What it reported doing in 2024

Tchfh lending, inc. Provides down payment and closing cost assistance grants to eligible low-income homebuyers and facilitates third-party down payment assistance programs and subordinate loans. Loans and grants were given to 268 homebuyers in fy25, including 113 habitat clients and 155 clients accessing region-wide dpa programs where lending inc. Acted as administrator or dpa originator.tchfh lending, inc. Is committed to fostering inclusive communities and advancing homeownership opportunities for all. Tchfh lending, inc. Expanded down payment assistance support tohomebuyers by participating in two region-wide down payment assistance programs. Clients outside of the tc habitat homeownership program received dpa support in the form of forgivable andrepayable loans, and post-purchase coaching and savings subsidies. Through these programs, 155 additional first-time homebuyers were supported in purchasing their first home to create pathways to long-term financial stability and generational wealth.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 62% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.9%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 58.6%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.27; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 31.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.9% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $353K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 17 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 39/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.