Humanility

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
825185974
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
6153361503
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$481,281
Expenses
$490,879
Assets
$49,747
Liabilities
$660

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROSE A THOMAS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROSE A THOMAS (PRESIDENT): $28,300 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We emancipate and empower victims of poverty and children at risk through compassionate care and sustainable economic and educational development.

What it reported doing in 2025

Multiple groups of people are ministered to through the humanility program. Street children and orphans are emancipated from abusers and traffickers, fed, clothed, educated and empowered to live productive lives. Victims of poverty are empowered with training, education, skill and employment opportunities to lead productive, healthier lives and reach their full potential as individuals, members of a family and members of a community. Survivors of disaster are given relief and educated with job skills and supplies to be empowered to recover and support themselves in a sustainable business. Humanility served 150 children in 2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.2%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 89.4%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2,313.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th 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: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 61st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.2% of revenue deployed · 89.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $439K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $28K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 23 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.