The Hope Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581967056
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Woodstock, GA, USA
Phone
7709240864
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,330,022
Expenses
$2,262,325
Assets
$2,987,121
Liabilities
$557,108

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CINDY O'LEARY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • TONY GEIST (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT ADERHOLT (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CINDY O'LEARY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $129,423 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission for the hope center is to equip pregnant women to choose life. Our vision is that every life is valued and families thrive in the love of chirst. The hope center programs incude options medical clinic, which specializes in pregnancy diagnosis and decision support, an education program, icu mobile program, and the seeds thrift store.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization, via its employees and approximately 150 volunteers donating approximately 11,000 hours, provided services during approximately 3,600 client visits at the woodstock location and in the mobile unit to residents of cherokee, cobb, fulton and surrounding counties in Georgia. Services include pregnancy testing, ultrasound services, pregnancy decision-support and education, childbirth preparation and parenting education, material resource provision, abstinence education, prayer, and spiritual support.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.5%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 76.4%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 54.5%; rating input score 55; 21st 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 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: 2.9%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.5% of revenue deployed · 76.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $129K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.