Freedom House Honduras Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
933527183
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Lakeland, FL, USA
Phone
8632514715
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Reported finances

Revenue
$406,268
Expenses
$105,193
Assets
$425,483
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RANDY HERRING (PRESIDENT)
  • KANDIE HERRING (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RUTH LUSHBAUGH (SECRETARY/TREASURER): $31,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide a sanctuary of safety, healing, and restoration for women who have endured violence and exploitation in homes, brothels, and red-light districts of san pedro sula and other cities in honduras. Through a holistic approach, we meet the physical, emotional, and spiritual needs of each woman, offering a refuge continued on schedule o

What it reported doing in 2025

1 we provided support and temporary housing for nine women in need. Each woman stayed for 1-4 days as new arrangements were made for safe housing. 2 in 2025, we started a weekly preventative program for at-risk girls. The program helps them understand their own value and worth, helps them plan for their future. It also helps them recognize predators and teaches self-defense. We started with about 12 girls per week. At the end of 2025, 50-70 girls were participating a week, or approximately 250 girls a month. 3 to continue the growth of our programs, more space is needed. We began the outdoor pavilion, cleaning the area for the protective wall, and converting the pool to a septic tank. 4 each year 6-8 teams from the USA visit freedom house honduras. Usually 10-12 women will join in the preventative programs, which often give away spa treatment bags. Members from local churches also participate periodically. Through the interaction everyone is encouraged to see how god is using fhh to empower and educate young girls about their options in life.

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 98% 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 - Revenue comfortably covers expenses and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 59
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 14.5%; rating input score 14
  • Program expense ratio: 55.8%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: $39.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 74.1%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.04; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.5%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 68.3% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 14.5% of revenue deployed · 55.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $59K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $31K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 14/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.