Living Hope Ilm
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 871371703
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Wilmington, NC, USA
- Phone
- 9102529258
- Rating
- 51
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $250,496
- Expenses
- $222,884
- Assets
- $42,993
- Liabilities
- $3,719
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHRISTINE PEREZ (PRESIDENT)
- MICHAEL PEREZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHAEL PEREZ (VICE PRESIDENT): $83,316 total reported compensation
- CHRISTINE PEREZ (PRESIDENT): $23,077 total reported compensation
- MARGARET MCBRIDE-STUART (SECRETARY): $6,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Living hope ilm operates living hope day center, a zero-barrier-of-entry day shelter serving individuals experiencing homelessness through hospitality, meals, resource navigation, service connections, life stabilization, and compassionate care.
What it reported doing in 2025
Provided meals and ministry to individuals experiencing homelessness in wilmington, nc.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, 49% for grants, and 1% for member benefits.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 32
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 42
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 34.3%; rating input score 34
- Program expense ratio: 38.5%; rating input score 38
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 57.1%; rating input score 57; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: 11%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.19; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 50.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 34.3% of revenue deployed · 38.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $86K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $83K · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 38/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 57/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.