Wellesley Housing Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311802126
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Wellesley, MA, USA
Phone
7814311019
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,096
Expenses
$3,800
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MICAH O'NEIL (CHAIRMAN & DIRECTO)
  • HOLLY GRACE (SECRETARY & DIRECTOR)
  • MICHAEL NILLES (TREASURER & 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

The wellesley housing development (whdc) is a non-profit corporation authorized by the 1997 annual town meeting and established by special legislation enacted in 1998 by the general court to create and preserve affordable housing (defined as housing for individuals or families with income at less than 80% of the region's median income) in wellesley. The whdc was formed to focus on creative ways to increase and preserve affordable housing in wellesley through partnerships & through its own.

What it reported doing in 2025

Sponsoring and assisting in development and preservation of affordable housing opportunities for persons of low and moderate income in the town of wellesley, Massachusetts. Providing analysis and advice to 1) the town of wellesley planning board in connection with its development of inclusionary zoning provision in the zoning bylaws and 2) the town of wellesley selectmen in connection with the preservation of the rental assistance subsidy at existing affordable housing projects. Monitoring and maintenance of such housing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 58.2%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -42.4% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.6% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.