Hands Offering Hope Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453798076
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Trumbull, CT, USA
Phone
2038075249
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$427,978
Expenses
$334,195
Assets
$1,954
Liabilities
$7,269

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GABE ERALES (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • GABE ERALES (PRESIDENT): $68,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We are a nonprofit culinary community that helps young people understand how valuable they truly are. We provide education and mentorship with chefs, culinary experts, entrepreneurs, and other change-makers around the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hands offering hope runs an accredited culinary institute that brings chefs from throughout mexico and the world to provide world-class, hands-on culinary and hospitality training. Our students are given the tools and experience to succeed in the local restaurants and hotels, nearby tourist areas, and in starting their own businesses. In 2024-2025, the following was accomplished: 1.12 students graduated 2.10 students were placed in internships at restaurants and hotels throughout quintana roo, mexico. 3.the following visiting chefs supported the foundation: 1.pablo soto, copenhagen denmark 2.wilson alonzo, halacho, yucatan 3.ine sarahid, holbox 4.luis rufino, merida, yucatan 5.franz quintero, quintana roo

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 62% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.8%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 54.9%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Pass
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 42nd 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.9%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 3.72; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.5%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -62.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42.8% of revenue deployed · 54.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $183K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $68K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.