Urbanpromise Honduras Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475558267
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
2545373487
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Delinquency Prevention
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$591,785
Expenses
$569,243
Assets
$385,308
Liabilities
$3,966

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN BLAIR QUINIUS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN BLAIR QUINIUS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $77,934 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To inspire the children and youth of honduras to reach their potential by equipping them with the skills necessary for life management, academic achievement, spiritual growth and leadership, rooted in the christian faith.

What it reported doing in 2025

Urbanpromise center for entrepreneurial leadership latin america - this program trains leaders for non-profit management and youth empowerment programs in latin america. The program is located within the office and programs of the honduras office. This fellowship invites leaders from latin america to learn the honduras model and then be quipped to replicate similar work in other regions. Urbanpromise honduras anticipates receiving a cohort of 5-10 leaders in this training program every 12-24 months. The addition of this latin america program will receive an allocation of around 10-15% of our budget.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.1%; rating input score 97; 48th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.8%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.7%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.1% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $484K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 44 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.