Hope and Mission Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
872487456
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Miami, FL, USA
Phone
3053191920
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$862,481
Expenses
$783,857
Assets
$111,388
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JORGE HUMBERTO RODRIGUEZ (DIRECTOR AND PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JORGE HUMBERTO RODRIGUEZ (DIRECTOR AND PRESIDENT)
  • MIRNA ESTELA LEIVA DE RODRIGUEZ (DIRECTOR)
  • CLAUDIA ROXANA CASTRO DE AMAD (DIRECTOR AND SECRETARY)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Shall nbsp; be nbsp; operated nbsp; exclusively nbsp; for nbsp; charitable nbsp; religiuous nbsp; educational nbsp; literary nbsp; and nbsp; scientific nbsp; purpose nbsp; but nbsp; no nbsp; limited nbsp; to nbsp; support nbsp; christian nbsp; evangelism nbsp; ministry nbsp; and nbsp; educational nbsp; support nbsp; clery nbsp; and nbsp; lay nbsp; persons nbsp; construction nbsp; and nbsp; maintenance nbsp; of nbsp; places nbsp; of nbsp; worship nbsp; defend nbsp; the nbsp; freedom

What it reported doing in 2024

Fundenal the main objective of the project is the construction of a new church on land that was donated by the foundation near san jose pinula. The short-term metric is the construction of the foundation for the gray work which is expected to encourage donations to continue with the project.

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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 11
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: $862.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • 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; 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: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.1%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 33.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 35.5% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $781K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 15 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.