Hope Partnership Inc D/b/a Community Hope Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800855060
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2021
Location
Kissimmee, FL, USA
Phone
3216770245
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Homeless Shelters

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,599,322
Expenses
$3,550,839
Assets
$6,934,836
Liabilities
$1,449,071

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CANDICE SIMMONS (PRESIDENT)
  • TAJIANA ANCORA-BROWN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARY DOWNEY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARY DOWNEY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $176,856 total reported compensation
  • WILL COOPER (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $110,737 total reported compensation
  • ESTHER RODRIGUEZ (CHIEF PEOPLE AND EQUITY OF): $105,632 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 aims to provide a holistic continuum of care in order to end homelessness and poverty in central Florida. We do this by connecting service providers, businesses, investors and clients with evidence-based solutions and trauma-informed care practices in order to strengthen communities, empower our neighbors, and build hope.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide programs to ensure everyone has a safe place to call home

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: Limited
  • 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.95; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.9% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.1% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $177K · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.