The NHP Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521636004
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 1 (202) 789-5300
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Development, Construction, Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $35,947,017
- Expenses
- $54,139,811
- Assets
- $536,877,982
- Liabilities
- $262,073,068
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
32 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RICHARD F BURNS (CEO & BOARD MEMBER)
- C MEADE RHOADS JR (VICE PRESIDENT)
- DAWN GUTIERREZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
- ERIC PRICE (PRESIDENT)
- FRED MITCHELL (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT)
- JOHN G HOFFER (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- RICHARD F BURNS (CEO & BOARD MEMBER): $760,054 total reported compensation
- STEPHEN GREEN (EVP & CIO): $517,569 total reported compensation
- ERIC PRICE (PRESIDENT): $512,500 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 NHP Foundation (NHPF) preserves and creates affordable housing as its North Star, providing high-quality affordable housing solutions for America's communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
The nhp foundation is a nonprofit organization dedicated to making investments that preserve and create affordable multifamily housing for low-to-moderate-income families and seniors. The foundation also provides a comprehensive array of programs and services to enhance the quality of life for its residents.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 66% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 68.4%; rating input score 68
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 97.2%; rating input score 97; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -50.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.92; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.49; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 5 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 68.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $37M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $760K · 32 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.6M reported
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 28 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 244 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.
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.