Tempe Coalition for Affordable Housing Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
825496629
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Tempe, AZ, USA
Phone
4809933555
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,653,432
Expenses
$1,176,567
Assets
$24,800,383
Liabilities
$67,961

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • IRMA HOLLAMBY CAIN (PRESIDENT)
  • CATHERINE CHIANG (VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • IRMA HOLLAMBY CAIN (PRESIDENT)
  • CATHERINE CHIANG (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • MANJULA VAZ (DIRECTOR)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support the acquisition, construction, or redevelopment of single & multi family residences, and to manage any properties constructed or acquired for the purpose of creating permanently affordable rental housing for low and moderate income persons residing in tempe Arizona.

What it reported doing in 2025

The coalition owned and operated over 70 units, including single-family homes, apartments, townhomes and condominiums dedicated to provide housing to individuals and families in tempe. The program encompasses low income housing, ranging up to and including workforce housing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 69% 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.
  • 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 93
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • 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: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 67.8%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.08; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -26.9% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.