Community of Hope
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 421668898
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Melbourne, FL, USA
- Phone
- 3214740966
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Homeless Shelters
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,663,244
- Expenses
- $1,342,296
- Assets
- $7,405,230
- Liabilities
- $6,213,910
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- R TRACY MASTERS (PRESIDENT)
- BRYAN BECKER (VICE PRESIDENT)
- PASTOR DAVID YOUNG ROMERO (PAST PRESIDENT EMERITUS)
- DREW WARREN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- DREW WARREN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $66,250 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Build hope and healthy families through a helping hand program of structured housing. Allow families with children to remain together in a safe and decent living environment so that they may grow strong, become self-reliant, transform their lives, and crush the cycle of homelessness and poverty.
What it reported doing in 2024
Safe overnight stay (s.o.s.): this program started in 2017 with a single unit dedicated to very short-term shelter leading to housing. The program proved to be effective and easily scalable, even in the face of a pandemic that significantly decreased shelter options throughout the county. S.o.s. Has grown through community support andpartnerships to include options for elderly adults and youth and young adults. We piloted this program with the homeless coalition serving 69 people in our first year. In 2020 community of hope s.o.s alone sheltered over 230 people and this number was magnified by those served by partner agencies. We anticipate continuing growth in this program. Perhaps more importantly, this program does not just shelter households but results in the vast majority attaining long-term, stable housing solution (92%).ready for hope (rfh): rfh is a version of our s.o.s. Program run in conjunction with our partner agency, ready for life. Ready for life specializes in providing wraparound services to transition aged youth (age 18 to 34), especially those who aged out of foster care. Community of hope provides shelter, housing case management, and housing assistance to these youth, allowing ready for life to focus on other supports and assistance needed to stabilize the client and prepare them for independence and success. This program has already been successful in sheltering and housing several of these vulnerable youths. Land of hope clt: over the past two years, we have laid the groundwork for our newest program the land of hope community land trust. We have not only set up the infrastructure for this program but also accomplished statewide certification for the program. The clt model allows us to acquire and hold land/property for permanent affordability. These properties can be used for both rental and homeownership but must always serve households under 80% ami. Mosaic outreach services: this outreach program started as a collaboration with mosaic church, a service-orientedchurch focusing largely on the needs of the homeless. Unfortunately, the church closed but coh has continued this service and the name, honoring the christlike spirit of this church. We go out in the community to work with the homeless where they are, provide for basic needs and help them find housing options.beacon thrift is scheduled to open early 2025, dedicated to supporting families transitioning out of homelessness. Beacon thrift will be a resource hub, providing essential household items and furniture, to families as they move into stable housing.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - 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 liabilities are high compared with assets.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 84.8%; rating input score 85
- Program expense ratio: 88.1%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 19.3%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.52; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.84; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 27.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 27.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 84.8% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $66K · 17 people listed
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.