Phoenix Hope International

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272612542
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Poway, CA, USA
Phone
6196639413
Rating
40
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Reported finances

Revenue
$106,921
Expenses
$64,243
Assets
$247,459
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Parker Fillmore (President)

People named in this filing

  • Parker Fillmore (President)
  • Lance Sommer (Director of Marketing)
  • Kent Sommer (Legal Counsel)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Phoenix Hope International is focused on improving health, education, and economic sustainability in impoverished, distressed, and underprivileged communities both abroad and domestically.

What it reported doing in 2025

Phoenix Hope International recently teamed up with Ghana Make A Difference (GMAD) to improve access to medical and surgical services in Ghana West Africa. Using funds raised from the 2023 Annual Redlands Turkey Trot, GMAD was able to complete construction on a new surgical center in record time. The surgical center will be used to perform life changing surgeries including cleft lip and palate repair, limb lengthening and strengthening procedures, burn wound reconstruction, and numerous other general and orthopedic surgeries.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39.9%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.85; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.