Yes Housing of Arizona Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
721534324
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Albuquerque, NM, USA
Phone
5059239606
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$404,659
Expenses
$1,502,247
Assets
$49,038
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AUGUSTINE C BACA (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • MICHELLE DENBLEYKER (VICE PRESIDENT/BOARD MEMBER)

Highest reported compensation

  • AUGUSTINE C BACA (PRESIDENT/CEO): $364,524 total reported compensation
  • MICHELLE DENBLEYKER (VICE PRESIDENT/BOARD MEMBER): $273,284 total reported compensation
  • HOLLY M BARELA (SECRETARY/TREASURER): $261,156 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Yes housing of Arizona, inc. Was formed to relieve the burdens of low-income, distressed, elderly, and disabled individuals through the preservation and provision of safe, decent, and affordable housing. The organization acquires, owns, and oversees affordable housing properties and engages in activities that further its charitable mission in accordance with section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code.

What it reported doing in 2025

During the 2025 tax year, the organization provided asset management oversight for two affordable housing communities located in phoenix, Arizona. Asset management activities included monitoring the financial performance and operational health of the properties, reviewing budgets and financial statements, overseeing regulatory compliance, evaluating property performance against established benchmarks, coordinating with property management, and supporting long-term capital planning. These efforts helped ensure the properties remained financially sustainable, maintained compliance with applicable affordable housing program requirements, and continued to provide safe, quality housing for low- and moderate-income residents in furtherance of the organization's charitable mission.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 58
  • Accountability: 56
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.8%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th 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: 40%; rating input score 40; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -271.2%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.1%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $365K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $102K reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 7 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.