New Hope Initiative Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 273984784
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Kingwood, TX, USA
- Phone
- 2814142059
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Private Grantmaking Foundations
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,171,092
- Expenses
- $1,175,332
- Assets
- $139,927
- Liabilities
- $64
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- Sandy Baird (Exec Director): $66,000 total reported compensation
- David Belk (Board Member): $29,552 total reported compensation
- James Wagstaff (Chair): $29,552 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 a Christian ministry, establish feeding centers, schools, medical clinics and orphanages in various foreign countries to provide food, education, and medical support to indigent children and their families.
What it reported doing in 2024
Kibera Slum in Nairobi, Kenya. NHI provides funds to: 1. New Hope Academy: NHI grants cover the entire operating cost of a full scholarship academy (400+ students pre-K thru grade 8) including facilities, teachers, staff, supplies, and two meals / day for the students 2. Penda Project: NHI grants cover secondary school scholarships for 160+ students graduating from New Hope Academy to go to area high schools and another 20+ students to go to university 3. New Hope Clinic: NHI grants cover the cost of basic medical services to student and their families via a registered nurse 4. Project Biashara: NHI grants cover job training and micro-business loans for ~30 single mothers to produce and sell goods
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 81% 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: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 98.8%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 98.4%; rating input score 98
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th 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: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 57
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- 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: -0.4%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -38.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 98.8% of revenue deployed · 98.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 15 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $66K · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.