Workforce Housing Lending Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 874624665
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022
- Location
- Sturgeon Bay, WI, USA
- Phone
- 9204483075
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Expense Reduction Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $302,250
- Expenses
- $71,558
- Assets
- $762,340
- Liabilities
- $509,148
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Noel Halvorsen (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Noel Halvorsen (President & CEO): $190,773 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To offer financing and other tools to increase the construction, availability, and accessibility of affordable workforce housing specifically in Door County, Wisconsin and generally throughout all of Northeast Wisconsin.
What it reported doing in 2025
The organization was newly established in 2022 and since inception has focused on building its board of directors and technical committees, securing funding, and staffing lending operations. Workforce Housing Lending Corporation's (WHLC) primary funding agreement has been executed with the Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority (WHEDA) to fund $1.5 million in loans from WHLC programs. WHEDA's participation loan requires a dollar-for-dollar match for each loan funded by WHLC, so the board is working with the local foundation to raise matching dollars. In 2025, WHLC closed on a their first loan with a developer that developed eight (8) new housing units in Sturgeon Bay. The developer purchased a mixed use building with an established business at street level and a vacant upstairs, which was completely remodeled to add eight (8) housing units. The $250,000 loan from WHLC helped make this nearly $1.2 million project a reality. We are consistently working with developers to deploy our unique financing tools to bring more housing projects to Door County and advance workforce housing development in the region and have two promising projects in the pipeline currently.
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
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: 41
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 73
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 20.5%; rating input score 21
- Program expense ratio: 86.7%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 76.3%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.65; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.67; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: 82.3% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 103.2% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 51.4% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 20.5% of revenue deployed · 86.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $62K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $191K · 14 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 21/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.