Project for Hope Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465060705
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Jacksonville, FL, USA
Phone
9047489559
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$271,256
Expenses
$116,225
Assets
$166,933
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jeff Abegglan (President)
  • Christopher Steed (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Jeff Abegglan (President)
  • Holly Steed (Officer)
  • Susan Brady (Officer)

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

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Project For Hope, Inc. exists to share the life-changing love of Christ with fatherless families through vocational training and employment for single mothers and widows, mentoring, and healthcare assistance for their families.

What it reported doing in 2024

Older Widow Project and Healthcare Assistance Program: Older Widow Project served fifty widows 65 years and older in the area of health needs, nutritional needs. The healthcare Assistance Program 10 families were provided assistance with healthcare including emergency dental services, emergency medical service and transportation, Dr visits and medicines for general illnesses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.8%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 57.2%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.44; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.5% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $116K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.