Heart of the Bride

Legal name: Heart of the Bride Ministries Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742848196
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Niceville, FL, USA
Phone
8506789008
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Roman Catholic
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,536,732
Expenses
$1,413,293
Assets
$717,924
Liabilities
$153,041

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN CRISMAN (CEO/DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIAN CRISMAN (CEO/DIRECTOR): $93,055 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We exist to help you answer the call of James 1:27; to meet vulnerable and orphaned children where they are with love, nutrition, healthcare, education, and the life changing Gospel of Jesus Christ; to see them RESCUED, REDEEMED, and RESTORED! Heart of the Bride wants to do everything we can to support and encourage those families that pursue foster care or adoption. In light of that commitment, and in response to the strong burden and oversight commitment from one of our supporters, the HOB Board of Directors unanimously voted to expand our mission to include adoption aid by providing assistance grants to adoptive families as God provides. HOB is not an adoption agency, but we do have resources and staff members that can provide valuable help in getting families started. In keeping with our overall mission, we will be helping families who have already made sacrificial commitments...

What it reported doing in 2025

Short-term mission trips to provide food and supplies, construction services, educational services, and business development support

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% 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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.5%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 94.1%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 79.3%; rating input score 79; 38th 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; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 4 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 86.5% of revenue deployed · 94.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $93K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.