Hope Distributed
Legal name: Hope Distributed Community Development Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 611542114
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Rockingham, VA, US
- Phone
- 1-540-578-3510
- Rating
- 91
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Food Banks, Pantries
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,875,518
- Expenses
- $1,946,616
- Assets
- $1,341,144
- Liabilities
- $13,362
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SAMUEL MONTANEZ (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JEFF WILHELM (EXEC DIRECTOR): $52,897 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 provide and promote social well-being to the citizens of Rockingham County and surrounding localities by providing relief to low-income individuals and families with food and clothing in a dignified and respectful manner.
What it reported doing in 2024
The food pantry continues to be the largest and costly program hope distributed facilitates.the pantry is open twice per week for in person (client) shopping and we make deliveries to "homebound" clients every tuesday and thursday on a rotating monthly schedule. In 2024, we served over 45,000 individuals in person at the pantry and delivered to 95 homes each month. Hope distributed also provided food boxes (400 per distribution) to rockingham county public school students, whose families were food insecure, during each of the extended breaks in the academic calendar. We have seen ebbs and flows to the number of individuals served, which is a regularity in food pantries. Many variables play a role in dictating the number of individuals seeking our asistance. The way hope distributed has been set up and managed, we are able to handle a significant increase in the number of clients we can successfully serve.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 99
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 98.6%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 97.6%; rating input score 98
- Fundraising efficiency: $5,175.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3.8%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 98.6% of revenue deployed · 97.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $53K · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.