Breaking Chains Honduras Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453633155
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
7657293056
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$530,014
Expenses
$515,640
Assets
$140,653
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEFF BROWN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GARY NEAD (BOARD OF DIR)
  • JAMIE RILEY (BOARD OF DIR)
  • LANCE BENNETT (CO-TREASURER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Breaking chains honduras is a nonprofit established to reach out, through grants and outreach, to those living in poverty in the capital city of honduras. The organization's mission is to serve and see change for those affected by poverty in tegucigalpa by meeting basic needs and developing human relationships that act as a gateway toward a relationship with christ. Breaking chains seeks to serve through street outreach and community benevolence, education and vocation initiatives, young adult ministry and volunteer outreach.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education and vocation initiative: education is a key element to breaking the cycle of poverty for families. Breaking chains is committed to lifting families up economically through providing access to education. Through grants, breaking chains sponsors 30 children for quality education opportunities through local, honduran-run schools. Additionally, it connects other children to necessary school supply resources. It also gives support to the education and vocation endeavors of socially at-risk young adults living in downtown tegucigalpa via school sponsorship, university sponsorship, and job resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 43% for direct work, and 57% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.7%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 93.2%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.7%; rating input score 97; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: 2.7%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.7% of revenue deployed · 93.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $481K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.