The Lend a Hand Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203644034
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Huntington, NY, USA
Phone
6314210368
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$5,797
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

People named in this filing

  • STEWART AIN (DIRECTOR)
  • JILL COHEN (SECRETARY)
  • ELLEN GREENBERG (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Form 990 part iii, line 1 - the lend a hand project, inc. Is dedicated to enhancing the lives of individuals and families in need on long island based upon the highest tenets of charitable giving. We extend a helping hand to provide not only material assistance but also ongoing relationships and friendship with dignity.

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

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: 90
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: Filed program service accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 10 of 10 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.