Hope Partnership for Education

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460493274
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2152325410
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Secondary, High School

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,032,416
Expenses
$3,339,126
Assets
$3,986,123
Liabilities
$1,019,345

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VIRGIL SHEPPARD (PRESIDENT / CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • VIRGIL SHEPPARD (PRESIDENT / CEO): $172,500 total reported compensation
  • TAYLOR HARRIS (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $119,213 total reported compensation
  • WARREN BALSA (DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $118,562 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Hope partnership for education's mission is empowerment through education. Hpe serves families in eastern north philadelphia through its education center, which houses an independent middle school, grades 5 - 8, an after- school enrichment program, a graduate support program and an adult education program.

What it reported doing in 2024

The hope partnership graduate support program is committed to providing a holistic support system for all graduates. By fostering genuine, long- lasting relationships with alumni and their families, our program is designed to facilitate a smooth and successful transition into high school and college, and develop responsible, and civically engaged members of the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.06 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.1%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.9% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $172K · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.