Hope Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941399287
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Jose, CA, US
Phone
408-284-2850
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Vocational Rehabilitation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$56,364,926
Expenses
$52,304,277
Assets
$60,467,665
Liabilities
$31,388,675

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES C HUGGINS (FORMER CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • CLAYTON NG (CFO (UNTIL 01/15/25)): $406,757 total reported compensation
  • CHARLES C HUGGINS (FORMER CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $356,878 total reported compensation
  • SUJAN VATTURI (CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER): $343,943 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Provide comprehensive, person-centered services to people with developmental disabilities so they can live meaningful, independent lives.

What it reported doing in 2024

Day activity and training services - these services are designed to help people with a wide range of developmental disabilities to achieve full social inclusion in the communities, regardless of the level of support they may need. This includes assisting with personal independence, life and social skills and community adjustments. These programs served over 1100 clients in various day activity or day training programs, including for seniors and children, in santa clara, san mateo, santa cruz, san benito and monterey counties.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 81% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.2%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $65.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 95%; rating input score 95; 34th 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: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.2%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.16; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.52; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 4 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 73.2% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $44.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $407K · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.6M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 39 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.