Queer Hands Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 990714391
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Atlanta, GA, USA
- Phone
- 4049132386
- Rating
- 90
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $76,089
- Expenses
- $68,643
- Assets
- $7,446
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Julian Derrick (CEO)
People named in this filing
- Erin Hogan (Director)
- Nicole Salazar (Director)
- Julian Derrick (CEO)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our primary exempt purpose is to provide accessible, low-cost handy work and household services to individuals in the Atlanta area while creating fair-wage job opportunities for local queer workers. We connect queer people who need help around their homes with skilled queer providers, making it easier for everyone to feel safe in their home and work.
What it reported doing in 2024
Provided living wages for to up to 23 members. Each member provides services as laid out in the organizations primary exempt purpose based on skill levels of member and requirement of service requested. The organization serviced 109 clients throughout 2024; some of which were singular jobs (such as mailbox installation) and others recurring jobs (such as monthly cleaning services.)
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 95
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91.8%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 9.8%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 33.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 91.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $70K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.