Hope and Love Works Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
392942191
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Bowling Green, FL, USA
Phone
8638998745
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religious Media, Communications

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,748
Expenses
$1,129
Assets
$619
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • George E Riddle (President, Director)

People named in this filing

  • George E Riddle (President, Director)
  • Eric H Riddle (Treasurer, Director)
  • Peggy W Hancock (Secretary, 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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The primary exempt purpose of Hope And Love Works Inc is to bring hope and love into the world with musical concerts, revivals, available media and community service.

What it reported doing in 2025

Program: Disaster Relief - In July, 2025, we accepted cash donations at three musical performances to help provide relief for victims of the flooding in Texas. The total amount of $848 was given as a cash grant to Redeemer Presbyterian Church, 1520 W Pipkin Rd, Lakeland, FL 33811 to be used to ship to Texas a truck and trailer loaded with the donated supplies that they had collected. The number of persons benefited and the impact to the community is incalculable.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 35.4%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.