Healing Hands for Haiti Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043486458
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
8016886545
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$188,779
Expenses
$173,175
Assets
$512,869
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jean-Baptiste E Brown (President)
  • Manuel De Heusch Desquiron (Vice President)
  • Rudolph Lalanne (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Jean-Baptiste E Brown (President)
  • Manuel De Heusch Desquiron (Vice President)
  • Rudolph Lalanne (Vice President)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Empower the people of Haiti to help themselves by delivering quality, sustainable physical medicine, rehabilitation education, training and care for adults and children with physical disabilities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provide quality physical medicine and rehabilitation services. Foster and encourage a spirit of self-determination, independence, and human dignity with the goal of empowering Haitians who live with disabilities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 60% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.4%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 70.4%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.3%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.96; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -17.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -15.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.4% of revenue deployed · 70.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $122K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 22 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.