Mission of Hope Inc Mission of Hope Haiti Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 134207776
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Cedar Park, TX, USA
- Phone
- 5122560835
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Protestant
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $24,841,287
- Expenses
- $24,735,880
- Assets
- $27,682,034
- Liabilities
- $703,310
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRAD JOHNSON (CEO)
- JOSH HODGES (PRESIDENT CARIBBEANONE)
- ANDREW GARRISON (PRESIDENT MISISON OF HOPE)
- OTIS GARRISON (VICE PRESIDENT)
- SHAWN MCGRATH (VICE PRESIDENT OF DONOR DEVELOPMENT)
Highest reported compensation
- BRAD JOHNSON (CEO): $313,881 total reported compensation
- DONALL ALLENSWORTH (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $166,800 total reported compensation
- JOSH HODGES (PRESIDENT CARIBBEANONE): $166,501 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
As an organization following jesus christ, mission of hope exists to bring life transformation to every man, woman, and child in haiti and the dominican republic. We desire to serve the nations of haiti and the dominican republic, and see lives changed by successfully executing on our five core resolutions: connecting people to jesus, empowering local leaders, serving people holistically, engaging people relationally, and stewarding with excellence.
What it reported doing in 2024
Construction projects - after the completion of the home building project in the leveque and minoterie communities, mission of hope is now focusing on replicating that same model of home construction in the villages of labodrie and titanyen. We believe that with larger lots and proper utilization of garden areas, many of the families can grow enough food not only for themselves, but also to sell in local markets or back to mission of hope. Additionally, mission of hope partners with the local villages and organizations to construct homes, churches, schools, orphanages, and latrines as needs arise in those villages. Medical care - basic medical care is hard to come by in haiti and the dominican republic. Mission of hope offers several programs to meet this critical need, though most in haiti such as prosthetics lab and vision clinic are currently on hiatus due to ongoing crisis. Mobile clinics where we serve take healthcare into villages and communitites. Orphan care - village of hope provides a quality home, a christ-centered education, and a loving church community to 11 orphans and 16 transition home students. Children in the orphanage are cared for by "mommies" who live on campus with them. Each mommy takes care of about 6 children, which provides the feeling of family and ensures each child is given personal attention. Pastors act as the spiritual fathers to these children, mentoring and discipling them alongside the mothers, to provide a godly example of manhood. Our primary goal is to resource local families and the church to meet the needs of orphans. In doing so, we will continue to care for our orphans and serve as a last-resort solution for orphans with no alternatives. In addition to the orphans still being cared for in the village of hope, 16 of our young adults, over the age of 18, live in the transition home. The transition home allows them to live on their own and get part-time jobs, while continuing to finish school and be mentored and partially supported by sponsors.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 47% for direct work, and 53% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83.7%; rating input score 84
- Program expense ratio: 84%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $22.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Limited
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Limited
- Requires financial reports: Limited
- Conducts site visits: Pass
- Requires grant agreements: Limited
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.4%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 83.7% of revenue deployed · 84% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $20.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $314K · 16 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $110K reported
- Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.