One Hope United - Florida Region

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
542082539
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3129495620
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,090,426
Expenses
$7,333,660
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Scott Humphrey (Chief Executive Officer)
  • Eva Horner (Executive Director)
  • Ruann Barack (Executive Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Scott Humphrey (Chief Executive Officer): $331,426 total reported compensation
  • David W McConnell (Former CFO/Treasurer): $184,424 total reported compensation
  • Cristina Strout (Chief Human Resources Officer): $181,186 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

One Hope United increases opportunities for children and families by providing quality solutions that enhance lives, communities and futures.

What it reported doing in 2016

In-Home and Out-of-Home Placement Services: One Hope United offers placement services when risk to a child from abuse and neglect is so great and the family situation is so deteriorated that the child must be removed from his or her home. We served 1,659 children through in-home and out-of-home placement services in FY17, with the majority of these children receiving foster care services. In foster care, we provide case management services with the child while working to strengthen the biological family so that the child may safely return home.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 98% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $140.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.2%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.9% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $331K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2009 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.