Designs For Hope
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 264785463
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2013
- Location
- Trussville, AL, United States
- Phone
- (205) 516-5515
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Religion Related N.E.C.
- Affiliation
- Religious (unspecified)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $582,742
- Expenses
- $630,908
- Assets
- $324,220
- Liabilities
- $6,029
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- Christopher Bond (Executive Dir.): $142,371 total reported compensation
- Mike Ennis (Director): $9,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Designs for Hope exists to equip and empower disciple makers in developing regions. Vision: To design and deliver innovative solutions to the physical and spiritual needs of disciple makers, which empowers them to ignite their communities with the gospel of Jesus Christ. My initial involvement with DFH served two passions — I wanted to serve the Lord in the mission field, and I wanted to serve my friend Chris with his engineering ministry. God teaches us that our skills and gifts are to be used first for His kingdom, and I saw DFH doing exactly that. Chris first asked me to serve on the board of directors, then on staff, and I have been happily involved since 2011. My primary focus now is introducing my engineering students to the ministry and looking at ways to refine and develop our engineering services. See our engineering work → Cale McGraw.
What it reported doing in 2025
Designs for hope personnel and volunteers partner with churches and missional organizations across the globe. In 2024, we ministered to 96,962 people, including 35,525 in unreached people groups across six countries and three continents. Our team provided engineering consulting, engineering project management, theological training, and community support. The main physical projects for the year 2024 included: 7 churches built, 13 water projects, 218 solar projects, and 1,055 pastors trained.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 93% 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 59
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 58.8%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 54.3%; rating input score 54
- Fundraising efficiency: $59.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th 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: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -8.3%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 24%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 58.8% of revenue deployed · 54.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $342K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $142K · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 59/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.