X Hope Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452028907
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Elk Grove, CA, USA
Phone
9163993972
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,245,337
Expenses
$1,240,503
Assets
$731,342
Liabilities
$16,119

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Wendi Cross (Executive Director)
  • Brandon Miller (Vice President)
  • Anthony Kavouras (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Wendi Cross (Executive Director): $110,918 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 Empower the at-risk children.

What it reported doing in 2025

X-Hopes Local Program supports at risk youth within the United States through local mentorship programs, training opportunities and supplying fundamental items to help them succeed. Provided 948 individual children with various support including infant care items, school supplies, clothing and more. Distributed over 500 Caring for Kids Kits which include backpacks full of school supplies for children changing or starting a school year. Distributed over $150,000 worth of in-kind donations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 80.6%; rating input score 81; 39th 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: 0.4%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.9%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.9% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.4% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.9% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $111K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.