Heart to Hand Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522137593
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Upper Marlboro, MD, USA
Phone
3017720103
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,409,476
Expenses
$5,308,370
Assets
$1,553,140
Liabilities
$709,633

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEDRA SPEARS-JOHNSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT DELAPENHA (MEDICAL DIRECTOR): $210,488 total reported compensation
  • DEDRA SPEARS-JOHNSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $163,688 total reported compensation
  • KENNETH PETTIGREW (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $119,536 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide support, education and resources that promote healthy lifestyles, decrease health disparities and increase access to quality health care

What it reported doing in 2024

Throuh cdc funding, heart to hand expaanded HIV/sti testing and prevention services for heterosexual black residents in prince georges and montgomery counties, reaching over 556 individuals. Key outcomes included prep navigation, rapid HIV testing, distribution of 22,000+ condoms, and strengthned community partnerships to improve access and customer experience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 84.8%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.9%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.46; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.8%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.2% of revenue deployed · 84.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 10 filed program accomplishments · $4.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $210K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $396K reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.