Hope for Haiti Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760784788
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2012, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Marble Falls, TX, USA
Phone
8307985444
Rating
94
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Agricultural Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$93,528
Expenses
$109,846
Assets
$370,974
Liabilities
$308,200

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM NEUSCH (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN WILLIAMS (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • WILLIAM NEUSCH (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN WILLIAMS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JANET NEUSCH (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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To assist the inhabitants of haiti through the word of god, the drilling of water wells, the establishment of educational facilities to promote literacy and enhance the lives of haitians physically and spiritually.

What it reported doing in 2015

To enhance the lives of haitians through the establishment of water wells, garden cooperatives and to assist in the teaching of literacy and the spreading of the word of god.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.3%; rating input score 94

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.4%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.38; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.83; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -60% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $104K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 to 2015
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.