The College Houses
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 741648710
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
- Phone
- 5124765678
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Student Services, Organizations of Students
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,958,391
- Expenses
- $4,739,002
- Assets
- $14,226,879
- Liabilities
- $10,294,753
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
26 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- R DANIEL MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- R DANIEL MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $80,889 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 serve as a transformative environment that empowers students through democratic, cooperative living. We provide affordable housing to foster community, support education, and promote personal development and well-being.
What it reported doing in 2024
College houses supports access to higher education for austin students by providing affordable housing, meals, and other educational services. College houses provides its members with unique opportunities to develop socially and become leaders in the austin community through partnerships with local nonprofits and cooperative organizations. Each semester, college houses provides housing to over 500 students who attend the university of Texas at austin, austin community college, and other area schools. All of our housing is affordable below 50% mfi, with some double-occupancy rooms affordable below 30% mfi. According to data from the city of austin, we are one of the largest providers of affordable housing in the university of Texas area. Our largest program by expense is the operational expenses related to maintaining the housing stock, including maintenance and debt service. Our next largest program by expense is providing meals to our members, both through the consumables and through the capital investments in commercial kitchen equipment. Our third largest program by expense is the direct educational offerings to members, mainly through the personnel costs required to offer ongoing training to co-op members needed to maintain the operation of the co-op.college houses co-ops are more than an affordable place to live, eat and study - our houses are educational communities. We provide a plethora of both formal and informal opportunities for members to hone their skills and broaden their experience. For example, some members may start off on a team that cooks house meals, and progress to the role of head cook, where they will manage peers in one of our commercial kitchens. From there they might run for election to serve as their house kitchen manager or food buyer, where they will master planning, financial, and leadership skills with help from staff. Another member may get especially interested in house meetings and become a meeting chair, where they will learn procedures and techniques that will allow them to lead others to make collective decisions. There are many ways students can learn and grow in our co-op communities, and we frequently hear feedback that members gain skills in the co-ops that set them apart in their future careers.college houses is committed to building on our strong foundations and long history in order to expand and improve our services. As austin continues to become a more populous and expensive city, it's more important than ever to preserve and expand our affordable housing, innovate new programs, and work with partner organizations to achieve our vision for a better community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 93
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 84.2%; rating input score 84
- Program expense ratio: 88.4%; rating input score 88
- 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.4%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.72; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 84.2% of revenue deployed · 88.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $81K · 26 people listed
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.