Friends of Hong Kong Charities

Legal name: Friends of Hong Kong Charities Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300136665
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kowloon, Hong Kong
Phone
(852) 2374 1182
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,242,642
Expenses
$6,203,626
Assets
$1,892,936
Liabilities
$2,007,618

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DAVID K SUTHERLAND (CHAIRMAN/TREASURER)
  • JAMES C GLOVER (DIRECTOR/SECRETARY)
  • ANDREW M OSTROGNAI (DIRECTOR (THRU 04/24))

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Friends of Hong Kong Charities, Inc. (FOHKC) is a registered tax-exempt organization in both the United States and in Hong Kong. FOHKC distributes donations to partner charities in Hong Kong. Less the direct cost of processing payments, 100% of all received donations are distributed as grants to approved charities; FOHKC retains absolutely no donations for overhead, salaries, or administrative costs. Mission Statement Friends of Hong Kong Charities is a volunteer organization that is committed to enabling faithful financial stewardship from US citizens through tax-deductible donations to charitable organizations serving in and from Hong Kong.

What it reported doing in 2024

To allow us citizens predominantly living in hong kong to support hong kong charities whereby their donations are recognized as charitable donations in the us thus encouraging more donations and support for these charities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.2%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 99.8%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th 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: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Pass
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.3%; rating input score 99; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.6%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.06; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 99.2% of revenue deployed · 99.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.