Yamhill Community Development Corp
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 931054093
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Mcminnville, OR, USA
- Phone
- 5034345265
- Rating
- 58
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,376,316
- Expenses
- $923,357
- Assets
- $5,177,634
- Liabilities
- $1,533,525
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JEFF KELLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- ALICE SPRINGER (PAST EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- TERESA SMITH (BOARD PRESIDENT)
- PATTIE WALTZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
- GERARDO PARTIDA (FUTURE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JEFF KELLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $39,234 total reported compensation
- ALICE SPRINGER (PAST EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $32,045 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 build quality, affordable housing, develop ownership, create equity & foster skills for low & moderate income families & individuals, while helping rural Oregon communities thrive by working in collaboration with public & private partners
What it reported doing in 2024
The guided self-help housing opportunity program assists low-income families in obtaining loans from usda rural development to build homes. The organization buys land in parcels and identifies applicants eligible to prticipate based on income and debt restrictions. Once approved, the organization acts as the general contractor during construction of the project. 12 families were assisted through this program during the fiscal year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 63% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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
MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 39
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 74
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 42.6%; rating input score 43
- Program expense ratio: 46%; rating input score 46
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- 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; 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: 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: 32.9%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.61; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 42.6% of revenue deployed · 46% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $425K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $39K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.