Deshis Hope International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464325765
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
3474031448
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$222,590
Expenses
$237,588
Assets
$241,762
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Todd J Madden (President)
  • Jennie C Madden (Vice-President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Todd J Madden (President): $100,000 total reported compensation
  • Jennifer Rodriguez (Secretary): $71,928 total reported compensation
  • Jennie C Madden (Vice-President): $850 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 create, form, and establish a Christian ministry to Bengalis; to provide financial support to Christian Bengali churches; to engage in charitable activities to benefit Bengalis.

What it reported doing in 2025

New York Ministry. We have a service center for Bangladeshi immigrants in Brooklyn. We provide ESL classes, job help, and other services for Bangladeshi immigrants to show the love of Christ. Our goal is to start a church for Bangladeshis in Brooklyn. We also work with churches to provide awareness about the needs of the Bengali people in Bangladesh and in New York City.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 57
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.3%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 86.5%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.3%; rating input score 98; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.02; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 72.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.3% of revenue deployed · 86.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $206K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.