Boys Hope Girls Hope

What it reported doing in 2019

The three largest affiliate programs are Arizona (phoenix area), northeastern Ohio (cleveland area), and Illinois (chicago area). There are two program pathways for middle and high school youth, residential and academy. Both programs feed into the postsecondary program, with these highlights: residential: 24/7 care with food, shelter and clothing in family-like homes, school placement, academic and whole-person development programming, postsecondary preparation, extra-curricular participation and community engagement. Academy: out of school time programming in evenings and on weekends that includes academic support, postsecondary preparation, whole-person development programming, and community engagement. Postsecondary: persistence advising, career preparation and networking, transition to career support, alumni association membership. As of march 1, 2021, the largest programs served these numbers of young people: Arizona: 14 residential, 35 academy, 35 postsecondary northeastern Ohio: 7 residential, 107 academy, 56 postsecondary Illinois: 24 residential, 35 postsecondaryover the past year, they and other affiliates have engaged with us in adapting our standard residential and academy model, with support through college, to the particular challenges presented by covid-19. In consultation with a task force comprised of experts in law, medicine, risk management, and insurance guidelines and templates for safely operating during the pandemic have been developed. Each affiliate adapted these to their site, with board of director approval. Most residential youth initially returned to their families to shelter in place. Our program teams provided aggressive case management that included addressing basic needs of food, supplies, and clothing, monitoring for safety and emotional support, and assistance with the transition to virtual school. They also delivered virtual programming for academic support/tutoring and recreation/social engagement. This included cooking classes, joint gaming, trivia, sharing music. The majority of residential scholars are now in our residential homes again.similarly, it has been vital to stay in contact with college students as they navigated the closing of their institutions. We assisted with transportation, transitional housing, and advising regarding financial, emotional, and academic matters. Through the virtual bhgh collegian caf, collegians connected with one another and leaders in mental health/wellness, career planning and transition, and internship opportunities. Those graduating high school from across the country are gathered to culminate their program participation and prepare for the transition to postsecondary. This event, called collegiate prep, was conducted virtually last year because of covid-19.persistence in programming, one important outcome for residential and academy programs, has maintained steady through the challenges. Progress toward degree completion is an important indicator for postsecondary students. This past semester we saw an increase in the average collegian grade point average.in addition to the focus on managing safely during covid-19, the national and international awakening to racism over the last year has allowed boys hope girls hope to make important progress in our own internal dialogue and work around diversity, equity and inclusion. New initiatives are focused on recruiting, retaining and developing a diverse team across the network, increasing the diversity of our boards of directors and finding new to coach scholars and collegians on navigating racism and helping to build more equitable communities. Given that we serve over 90% young people of color, this work is especially critical.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 80%; rating input score 80
• Program expense ratio: 76.8%; rating input score 77
• Fundraising efficiency: $7.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
• Pay-setting controls: Limited
• Foreign activity oversight: Limited
• Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
• Major donor itemization: Limited
• Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

• Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
  • Whistleblower policy: Pass
  • Document-retention policy: Pass
  • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
  • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
  • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
  • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
  • Audit committee oversight: Pass
  • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

• Operating margin: -1.1%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.37; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 8.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings