Dreams of Hope

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
432057957
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4123612065
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Theater

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$254,163
Expenses
$288,485
Assets
$418,065
Liabilities
$75,925

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID WARGA (FORMER OFFICER): $63,402 total reported compensation
  • BEKEZELA MGUNI (EX-OFFICIO ARTISTIC DIRECTOR): $63,129 total reported compensation
  • MALACHIAH KOEHLER (EX-OFFICIO PROGRAM ASSISTANT): $11,868 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our core values: all youth deserve respect. All people are creative. Creative expression connects people. Open dialogue is a foundation for empathy and peace. Multidisciplinary arts develop the entire person.build awareness, and increase acceptance.dreams of hope operates two programs: a performance ensemble = theatriq - a neighborhood based open stage, and a knowledge and resource dissemination about lgbtqa+ = sqool.

What it reported doing in 2022

Theatriq is our cornerstone performing arts program. Each fall a combination of staff members and independent contractors convene as a working group of professional artists to recruit, identify, and develop a cohort of ten youths ages 13-26 to join the annual theatriq youth ensemble. During the winter, they guide a youth cohort to create an original full-length, multidisciplinary play. They complete and rehearse the show in the spring and produce multiple performances. All performances conclude with the ensemble engaging the audience in a conversation about the show and lgbtqa+ topics. In addition to the main-stage show, the youth leaders collaborate with staff to decide on other projects the troupe wants to take on. Resumed in-person programming, began a mentorship program, added community-based programming with local educational, cultural, artistic, and community partners, and produced an alcohol-free youth pride week event.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.5%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 49.7%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.5%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.45; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 48%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.5% of revenue deployed · 49.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $143K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2012 to 2022
  • 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 56/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.