True Hope Pregnancy and Family Resource Center of Gibson County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
922113132
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Princeton, IN, USA
Phone
8126350112
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$191,049
Expenses
$117,861
Assets
$162,054
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Julie Kifer (Executive Director)
  • Elizabeth Hirsch (President-Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Julie Kifer (Executive Director): $29,000 total reported compensation
  • Kelly Bailey (Secretary-Director): $8,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

True Hope is a pregnancy and family resource center that offers specialized programs and services to anyone who is experiencing an unplanned pregnancy or difficult life circumstances. We offer pregnancy testing pregnancy consulting healthy lifestyle education mentoring life skills program for men and women infant supplies through our life skills program healtcare and community resource referrals adoption referrals professional counseling referrals miscarriage recovery services and abortion recovery services.

What it reported doing in 2025

We offer pregnancy testing pregnancy consulting healthy lifestyle education mentoring life skills program for men and women infant supplies through our life skills program healthcare and community resource referrals adoption referrals professional counseling referrals miscarriage recovery services and abortion recovery services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% 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 and most voting board members are independent. 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: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30.8%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 49.9%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 38.3%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 18.7% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 54.8% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30.8% of revenue deployed · 49.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $59K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $29K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 44 current checks pass · 10 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticIndividuals column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column 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: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.