Neighborhood Hands

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
832445007
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Campbell, CA, USA
Phone
5743151590
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$810,761
Expenses
$796,033
Assets
$46,451
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN POWERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • PATRICK O'MEARA (BOARD PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIAN POWERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $58,437 total reported compensation
  • KAMA FLETCHER (DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $36,458 total reported compensation
  • LUIS PALACIOS (BOARD MEMBER): $6,481 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Neighborhood hands creates opportunities for people experiencing homelessness or economic insecurity to connect with their community and find support. Through activities that improve shared spaces, we bring neighbors together-housed and unhoused-to build relationships, strengthen our neighborhoods, and foster a more inclusive community where everyone can thrive.

What it reported doing in 2025

" in 2025, through 26 homeless outreach and park cleaning programs at guadalupe gardens in san jose, ca, neighborhood hands connected an estimated 950 unduplicated unhoused or economically insecure volunteers with stipends, essential resources, and positive community. With an average of 291 total neighbors (avg. 227 unhoused or very low-income) attending per program, neighborhood hands cleared an estimated 342,040 pounds of park debris and trash from guadalupe gardens, guadalupe river park, and surrounding areas, and logged an estimated 15,000 hours alleviating homelessness, economic hardship, and social isolation in 2025. Additionally, in collaboration with an average of 16 public, private, and nonprofit partners per program, neighborhood hands' unhoused and very low-income volunteers were connected with many essential resources - including food and water, healthcare, mental and behavioral health services, housing and case management, employment opportunities, legal assistance, mobile showers, vision care, bicycle repair, clothing and hygiene supplies, mobile phones, and more.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 86% of its reported program spending out as 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 28
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 89.7%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98%; rating input score 98; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 1.8%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.7%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 33.6% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 48.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88% of revenue deployed · 89.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $714K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $58K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.