Hope Station Opportunity Area Neighborhood Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251886489
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Carlisle, PA, USA
Phone
7172495144
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$238,982
Expenses
$228,743
Assets
$254,611
Liabilities
$6,921

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TAVARES TYLER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROGETTE HARRIS (EXECUTIVE DI): $22,185 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The hope station opportunity area council provides a variety of grassroots services that educate, empower, and support underrepresented children and their parents and guardians throughout the carlisle area community. In our 17 years of existence, we have developed ongoing relationships with families and organizations throughout carlisle that allow us to maximize the impact of our initiatives.

What it reported doing in 2024

Youth services include after-school programs, summer camps, food programs, tiered youth leadership programs, bike repair/giveaways, art and athletics programs, and scholarships. Services for adults include job training and interview preparation, computer skills programs, narcotics anonymous (na) and community-building events such as dinners and holiday parties.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.5%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 63.5%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.11; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.7%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.5% of revenue deployed · 63.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $145K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $22K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.