Help for Haiti Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272928991
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2010
Location
RYE, NH, USA
Phone
6039697206
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$379,521
Expenses
$695,410
Assets
$177,708
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES M WILLEY (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES M WILLEY (PRESIDENT)
  • JARED WILLEY (DIRECTOR)
  • MATTHEW WILLEY (DIRECTOR)

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

Help for haiti is a christian 501c3 organization with a three-part mission to feed and educate children, and to continue to support them until they have the employment skills to secure their future.

What it reported doing in 2025

The foundational component of our efforts is to feed hungry children in north haiti. Chronic malnutrition affects nearly one in every four children in all of haiti under five years old. Without food, children have no capacity to experience physical or mental growth. Every year, we raise funds to purchase nutrient-dense mannapack meals through feed my starving children, a christian nonprofit organization. These meals are based on the caribbean staple food: rice. They also contain soy, dehydrated vegetables, vitamins and minerals that are essential to the growth of a malnourished child. Help for haiti paid the cost of trucking in the us from feed my starving childen's distribution center to Florida where the food was put in a container and shipped to cap haitien haiti. Help for haiti pays for the shipping and duty in haiti and subsequently the trucking costs to deliver the food to the schools in haiti.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for 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: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -83.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 14; 14th 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: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $572K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.