Justhope Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260430769
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Tulsa, OK, USA
Phone
9189323209
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$38,804
Expenses
$43,344
Assets
$53,841
Liabilities
$407

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHY MCCALLIE (President)

People named in this filing

  • LYNNE BRADLEY (Director)
  • KATHY MCCALLIE (President)
  • MICHAEL QUINTIN (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to create global partnerships, combat extreme poverty, and nurture sustainable community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Justhope continued to support and strengthen projects in our partner communities of chacraseca and la flor, focusing in four areas of development: health, education, social enterprise, and agriculture. Justhope suuports integrated health care, acess to clean drinking water and clean burning stoves, as well as the purchase of medication and dental supplies to the local health clinics. We provide backpack scholarships to elementary school children and university scholarships. We support the cultural center, which provides dance classes, music lessons, and cultural activities, through staffing and facility maintenance. Additionally, we provide training to facilitate the sustainability of women led microcredit banks and support for the stitching hope sewing cooperative. Justhope continues to operate a local model farm, modeling alternative agricultural appraches to improve crop yields, experimenting with new crops, and providig workshops to local farmers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 96% 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: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 67.9%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.7%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.24; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16.6% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.2% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.7% of revenue deployed · 67.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $29K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.