High Point Neighborhood Family Center

Legal name: High Point Community Pride Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593529732
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Clearwater, FL, US
Phone
(727) 533-0730
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Neighborhood, Block Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,326,515
Expenses
$1,382,952
Assets
$1,159,710
Liabilities
$203,164

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FREDRICK GREEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • FREDRICK GREEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $72,392 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 listen and to respond to the needs of our culturally and economically diverse community, by providing encouragement, assistance, education, and services to promote a better quality of life.

What it reported doing in 2024

For over twenty years, hpnfc has served our ethnically diverse and underprivileged neighborhood by providing financial assistance, education, after-school care, and numerous other services. With a focus on children, hpnfc enhances the quality of life. Our youth & teen programs strive to improve academic performance by focusing on increasing literacy levels. For families with children, we offer after-school services and summer camp activities that include music, art, sports, and a variety of weekly field trips. Hpnfc provides adult services that stabilize families such as assistance paying utility bills, job training, bus passes, goal setting, clothing, and basic needs. Hpnfc also has multiple community activities such as resource & job fairs, parent workshops & community holiday festivities for families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 62% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.1%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -4.3%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.2%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 91.1% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $72K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.