Human Life International Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521241765
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Front Royal, VA, USA
Phone
5406357884
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Human Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,876,439
Expenses
$3,079,720
Assets
$6,861,251
Liabilities
$509,309

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN MARTIN (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SHENAN BOQUET (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN MARTIN (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $102,243 total reported compensation
  • LOUIS MASSETT (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $66,410 total reported compensation
  • SHENAN BOQUET (PRESIDENT): $65,025 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Receive, administer, and expend funds for charitable, religious, and education purposes in connection with the rights of persons both born and unborn.

What it reported doing in 2024

Conferences: hli inc. Supports, attends, and participates in regional conferences around the world in support of pro-life and pro-family education and activities, providing opportunity for attendees to share information, establish contacts, and generate action from the community on either local or regional levels.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 29
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 26%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 38.5%; rating input score 39
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.7%; rating input score 90; 26th 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: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36.8%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.23; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 26% of revenue deployed · 38.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $102K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.