Project Joy & Hope

Legal name: Project Joy & Hope for Texas

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760646721
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pasadena, TX, US
Phone
713-944-6569
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospices

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,589,445
Expenses
$1,123,515
Assets
$5,514,807
Liabilities
$5,217

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANICE H WHEELER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JANICE H WHEELER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $150,004 total reported compensation
  • SHELLEY FULLER (DIR OF DEVELOPMENTVOL): $132,007 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Supporting medically fragile children and their families.

What it reported doing in 2024

The pjh family assistance grant program provides direct financial support to families caring for a seriously ill child at the Texas med center, helping relieve urgent & unexpected expenses during medical treatment.families are often referred to the program by hospital social workers, ensuring assistance reaches those with the greatest and most immediate needs.grants may help cover essential costs such as transportation, lodging, utilities, food & other critical household expenses strained by prolonged illness.by easing financial pressure, the program allows families to remain focused on their childs care & well-being.delivered with compassion & dignity, this program helps stabilize families & prevent further hardship during a time of crisis.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.8%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $31.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 3rd 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; 76th 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: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.3%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.91; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.1%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 67.8% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $296K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • 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: 2 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.