The Hope Store Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272749637
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Alpharetta, GA, USA
Phone
4049634332
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Thrift Shops

Reported finances

Revenue
$247,142
Expenses
$265,745
Assets
$37,825
Liabilities
$67,847

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EMORY MURPHY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • RANDY THOMPSON (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RANDY THOMPSON (VICE PRESIDENT): $26,524 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Operate retail thrift store. Collect donated merchandise and resale to the general public. Net proceeds are donated to various community and religious exempt organizations.

What it reported doing in 2017

There were no program service accomplishments. This is a retail thrift store operation

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.5%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.79; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -12.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 2 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $27K · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 24 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2017
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.