Transformation House Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454083505
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2020
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Green Bay, WI, USA
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$234,138
Expenses
$299,187
Assets
$1,572,715
Liabilities
$1,602,834

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Manuelus Reacco (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Manuelus Reacco (President): $34,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Encouraging "men to be men" by providing them with shelter at a reduced/affordable rate while nurturing their spiritual, educational and social development.

What it reported doing in 2020

Transforomation House provides men with past substance abuse, past challenges with relationships, and past imprudent life choices with affordable housing while nurturing their spiritual, personal, educational and social development. Residents receive life skill classes, counseling, job search assistance, special seminars, financial guidance and linkage to churches and social services. In turn, men staying at the facility must hold a job or be actively searching for a job, and maintain total drug and alcohol abstinence. Only men who are totally committted to changing their lives are admitted and allowed to stay with the program. The primary purpose is to empower men to regain their independence. In addition to the housing facilities, the building also houses a soup kitchen, food pantry and drug and alcohol abuse recovery service. Residents pay a weekly fee, have a list of chores to complete at the facility, and give back by volunteering at the soup kitchen and food pantry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.

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: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 57
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.9%; rating input score 96
  • 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: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -27.8%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.26; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.02; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.4%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 48.1% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $287K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $34K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2013 to 2020
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.