Living Hope International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611516195
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Milford, MI, USA
Phone
5869179882
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$543,602
Expenses
$529,195
Assets
$334,461
Liabilities
$102,752

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sharilyn Glover (President)

People named in this filing

  • Brian Beer (Director)
  • Kim Cooke (Chairman of the Board)
  • Sharilyn Glover (President)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of Living Hope is to foster life, love and leadership by creating Christ-following communities that break the cycle of poverty and enable each Living Hope child to achieve his or her God-given potential.

What it reported doing in 2024

The 20 children and housemothers are housed on the LHI campus. The children are fed, clothed, provided medical care, sent to school, and nurtured in a Christian atmosphere. Seventeen additional post-grade 12 graduates in university and vocational programs are also being provided care and support. A bus is kept and maintained to transfer the children to and from school. The Living Hope Christian Academy opened in 2024 and has 75 children attending primary school and Living Hope's feeding program.

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 75% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.9%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $33.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 2.7%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $502K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.