Bridge of Hope Harrisonburg-rockingham
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 900451234
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2011
- Location
- Harrisonburg, VA, USA
- Phone
- 5404782356
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $423,896
- Expenses
- $267,373
- Assets
- $797,960
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- HEIDI HOOVER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- HEIDI HOOVER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $45,752 total reported compensation
- DEIRDRE SMELTZER (IMMEDIATE PAST ED): $84 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 engage christian faith communities in ending family homelessness through neighboring relationships that demonstrate christ's love.
What it reported doing in 2025
In the 2025-2026 fiscal year, bridge of hope harrisonburg-rockingham served nine families, comprised of nine adults and 21 dependent children, while providing holistic support through safe housing, intensive case management, and relationships with neighboring volunteers from local faith communities. Five families moved into permanent housing during the year, and four families successfully graduated from the program after an average of 13 months. All graduating families (100%) exited to safe and sustainable housing, 100% increased their income during their time in the program, and 100% of exiting women were employed at graduation. Bridge of hope also engaged 46 neighboring volunteers, including 30 newly trained volunteers who completed the strangers to neighbors training before being matched with families. During the fiscal year, the organization also took a significant step toward expanding affordable housing in the community by securing property and advancing plans for the development of four permanently affordable townhomes that will provide long-term housing opportunities for families. Through these intentional partnerships and innovative housing initiatives, bridge of hope continued to strengthen families experiencing homelessness by combining professional services with caring, long-term community relationships.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 51.6%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 76.6%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: $17.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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: 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: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 36.9%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.98; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.1%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 19.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 25.9% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 51.6% of revenue deployed · 76.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $205K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.