Project Hope Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
753099628
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Costa Mesa, CA, USA
Phone
9497227824
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,724,185
Expenses
$3,418,037
Assets
$1,246,931
Liabilities
$751,127

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jennifer Friend (CEO)
  • Lynn Hemans (Director/Current President)
  • April Negrete (DIR./CURRENT VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jennifer Friend (CEO): $250,698 total reported compensation
  • Shelby Feliciano-Sabala (Chief Partnership Officer): $114,223 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of project hope alliance is to end the cycle of homelessness, one child at a time. Our vision is equipping homeless children with the tools and opportunities to learn their way to a better tomorrow.

What it reported doing in 2024

Onsite and Offsite Case Management - the organization deploys a long-term, on-site intervention model for children and youth experiencing homelessness, who face obstacles that prevent them from accessing resources, being a kid, and achieving educational and life goals. They work one-on-one with kids, placing full-time case managers on elementary, junior high, and high school campuses. Case managers identify homeless students and remove barriers to their basic needs (such as food, clothing, or transportation). As stable and trusted adult mentors, they also conduct regular check-ins to provide educational support and facilitate connections to needed resources. (Case management for post-high school youth is provided individually and is not tied to a school campus.) The organization served 1,191 students during the fiscal year ending 6-30-2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.2%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.6; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.2% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $251K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.