Eight Days of Hope

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
753212540
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Tupelo, MS, United States
Phone
(662) 844-6934
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Home Improvement and Repairs
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,183,767
Expenses
$6,440,587
Assets
$13,725,085
Liabilities
$47,195

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVE TYBOR III (PRESIDENT &)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVE TYBOR III (PRESIDENT &): $279,780 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Eight Days of Hope serves as the hands and feet of Christ—providing light in the face of darkness and restoration in the face of destruction by responding to disasters across the country and helping to rebuild homes, communities, and lives. We’re so grateful to the companies and organizations who have sponsored Eight Days of Hope to support our mission and provide needed resources for our projects. Learn more about each of our amazing partners! American Family Radio. Is your company or organization interested in helping us fulfill our mission to love and serve those in need? Eight Days of Hope Contact Us. Eight Days of Hope is blessed with many wonderful volunteers from all around the country and even the world — many of whom have followed Eight Days of Hope on multiple rebuilding events and rapid response trips. Because of the commitment volunteers show to serve God and serve...

What it reported doing in 2025

Eight days of hope, inc (edoh) is a nonprofit, charitable organization which exists to bring volunteers to a location affected by natural disaster and assist homeowners in rebuilding and repairing their homes damaged as a result of the disaster. Edoh also builds safe houses for those rescued from human trafficking. Working with ministries that are already providing hope to those rescued, edoh will renovate or build facilities for free, for ministries in need. Edoh is a ministry to serve those in need and for those volunteers who have a desire to serve. Edoh provides food, lodging, logistics, materials, equipment, and the opportunity for morning and evening times of worship for volunteers and homeowners. It is through the efforts of these volunteers and the blessings of god that allow for the accomplishments described in this financial report. In 2025, edoh celebrated 20 years of serving those in need. Edoh served almost 700 families through its rapid response and rebuilding ministries, provided roughly 12,000 meals, and built or remodeled five places of restoration for survivors of trafficking. Edoh served in los angeles, ca after devastating wildfires, bear branch, ky, hunt, tx, kerrville, tx, and wheeling, wv, after massive flooding and cave city, ar, tylertown, ms, greenwood, ms, st. Louis, mo, london, ky, after catastrophic tornadoes. Edoh's safe house ministry partnered with call to freedom in sioux falls, sd, safe harbor Ohio in holmes, co, oh, elijah rising in houston, tx, transformation garden in northeast, ms and a way out ministries in memphis, tn, to build and renovate safe homes for women and children rescued from trafficking. In buffalo, ny, our annual community event served 340 families with roofing, painting, carpentry, landscaping and more.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.6%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 59.7%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.9%; rating input score 97; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.3%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.13; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 56.6% of revenue deployed · 59.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $280K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 15 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.