Trinity Love Hoblit Foundation C/o Harrison Poole
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 814185855
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
- Phone
- 9042063326
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Neurology, Neuroscience Research
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $38,804
- Expenses
- $29,704
- Assets
- $28,420
- Liabilities
- $750
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Olivia Hoblit (President)
- Phil Hoblit (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Harrison Poole (Board Member)
- Susan Dowling (Board Member)
- Ramiro Sicre (Board Member)
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
The organization's purpose is to support and fund neurological research, training, and treatment for brain aneurysms, strokes, and other cerebrovascular conditions andto raise awareness.
What it reported doing in 2024
The trinity love hoblit foundation gala benefits thetrinity love hoblit foundation through a silent auction anddinner provided to 100 attendees, to support and fundneuroscience research, training, and treatment for brain aneurysms, strokes, and other cerebrovascular conditions at wolfson's children'shospital and baptist neurological institute, or any other similarlocal, regional, national or international facility; and to raiseawareness and educate the public about the causes, identification, diagnoses, prevention, and treatment of brain aneurysms, strokes, andother cerebrovascular conditions.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 58
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
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: 23.5%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -8.6% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.