Sowhope Org

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
141946849
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Rockford, MI, USA
Phone
6164331575
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$623,787
Expenses
$612,238
Assets
$609,780
Liabilities
$46,196

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mary Dailey Brown (Corp President and CEO)
  • Lisbeth Leeson (Corp Vice President/Secretary)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mary Dailey Brown (Corp President and CEO): $103,335 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To inspire women around the world by promoting Wellness, (i.e. maternal and women's healthcare, fistula repair, prolapsed uterus repair, emotional care for abuse and rape, and female genital mutilation and trafficking prevention) Education, (i.e. literacy and vocational training) and Economic (i.e. micro enterprise and small business training) opportunities for impoverished women making less than $3.00 per day. In 2025, 4,466 women were empowered as SowHope funded 33 projects in 14 developing world countries.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Education Program serves the Literacy needs of illiterate women. Additionally, we funded vocational and technical training projects that provide practical needed skills, which are utilized by women to procure gainful employment and/or to start small income-generating businesses. 121 women were served through the SowHope Education Program of 2025. This includes 4 projects in 4 developing nations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 88.5%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 51st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.9%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.1% of revenue deployed · 88.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $542K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $103K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 44 of 46 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.