Homeless ID Project
Legal name: Homeless Id Project Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 860664652
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Jun 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 602-223-3427
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Religion Related N.E.C.
- Affiliation
- Religious (unspecified)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $593,079
- Expenses
- $616,806
- Assets
- $165,568
- Liabilities
- $26,079
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RICK MITCHELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- CHRISTOPHER M RICH (PRESIDENT)
- MANNY LOYDEN (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- RICK MITCHELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $65,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Homeless ID Project provides individuals and families the IDs required for obtaining a job, housing and other services so they may exit their homelessness. We work closely with partners, donors, volunteers, and community organizations to remove these barriers for people experiencing homelessness. If you’re new to the Homeless ID Project, this page will help you understand what we do, who we help, and why identification is such a critical first step toward rebuilding a life. Explore the answers to our most frequently asked questions below to learn how our services work and how you can support this mission. What does the Homeless ID Project do?
What it reported doing in 2025
Homeless id project provided replacement documents to clients seeking to end their homelessness. Hidp also provided safe storage of documents and a safewallet for those carrying documents while living on the street.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for member benefits.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 69
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 90.3%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $14.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 94% of revenue deployed · 90.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $557K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 19 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.