Skip to content
Hope and Equip Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Hope and Equip Inc

To facilitate kingdom growth throughout the world by empowering people through agricultural, educational, financial, medical, recreational, and vocational ministries.

$521k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$188k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Religion$726kInternational$387kCommunity Improvement$130kCrime & Legal$60kHealth$25kHousing & Shelter$25kHuman Services$5k
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $507,242, the rows itemized in this filing. The $521,181 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $13,939 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $122k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $385k
$25,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$46k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RWANDA CHILDREN$188,035
FLINT GLOBAL$130,427
GREAT CITIES MISSIONS$66,360
TENNESSEE PRISON OUTREACH MINISTRY$30,000
JOHN 317 MINISTRY$25,000
LIVING HOPE FOR HONDURAS$23,420
AGAPE ASIA FOUNDATION$19,000
BAJA MISSION INC$15,000
HOMEWOOD CHURCH OF CHRIST$10,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY21–24, $93k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 57% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%OUR DAUGHTERS INTERNATIONAL: $40k → 8%AGAPE ASIA FOUNDATION: $19k → 14%AGAPE ASIA: $14k → 14%Charitable donations: $11k → 14%Agape Asia Foundation: $10k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

82%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 7 repeat orgs$238k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +154% since the first grant, against +106% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
4

Total granted

$1.1M
$60k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+154%
+106%

Still filing today

57%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $179k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesInternationalHousing & ShelterCrime & LegalOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • RC
    Rwanda Children
    4× · 2021–2024 · $270k · revenue +154%
  • TP
    TENNESSEE PRISON OUTREACH MINISTRY INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $60k · revenue +192%
  • CA
    CHINESE AGAPE FOUNDATION
    4× · 2021–2024 · $53k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • OD
    Our Daughters International
    one grant, 2023 · $40k · revenue +5%
  • BH
    BRENTWOOD HILLS CHURCH OF CHRIST
    one grant, 2021 · $7k
  • FC
    Freeport Church of Christ
    one grant, 2021 · $7k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Hope of Honduras Inc

Organization operates a children's home in Honduras that provides food, clothing, shelter, medical care and education to abused and abandonded children in need.

International
2
Child Hope International

We minister to orphans and widows in their distress by transitioning children from orphanages into loving families. We do this through Christ- centered care, training and social work.

Arts & Culture
3
Global Orphan Hope

Global Orphan Hope seeks to serve by caring for orphans around the world. Global Orphan Hope believes that every child deserves to be loved, to feel secure, and to have a place to call home. When a child cannot remain with his/her family,…

Human Services
4
Orphan Outreach

To glorify the Lord Jesus Christ by ministering to orphans around the world by meeting spiritual, physical, emotional, and educational needs.

International
5
Sonshine Ministries International

We provide homes, a healthy diet, medical treatment, quality education, and counseling for orphaned abused and neglected children in Tanzania, East Africa. Sonshine works directly with Child Welfare Services of Tanzania. CWS provides…

—
6
My Father's House International Inc

The mission of My Fathers House International Inc (MFHI) is to assist the orphaned and abandoned.

International
7
Childrens Haven International

To raise donations and support for providing housing, education, care support for children in the Reynosa Mexico area who are in need of refuge.

Human Services
8
Grace International Childrens Foundation Usa

Childrens Home in Uganda

Human Services
9
Children of Promise International

Children of promise international is a nonprofit organization providing humanitarian aid, relief and development in approximately 7 countries for the purpose of caring for orphans, widows, and destitute children and outreach to the poor…

—
10
A Child's Hope International

To motivate and mobilize the church and community to care for the orphans and vulnerable children.

Human Services
11
Orphanos Foundation

Christian-based aid to orphans

Human Services
12
Children of Faith Missions

To provide poor and underpriviledged children with a safe place that fulfills their need for food, clothing, shelter, health care, education, and Christian love.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Our Daughters International; the most unlike its peers is Anchor Pointe Recovery Center Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

9 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 15 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GREAT CITIES MISSIONS: $481,658 · OtherGREAT CITIES MISSIONSRwanda Children: $270,410 · OtherRwanda ChildrenBERRYS CHAPEL CHURCH OF CHRIST INC: $154,611 · OtherBERRYS CHAPEL CHURCH OF CHRIST INCFIRST COLONY CHURCH OF CHRIST: $50,000 · Other+3 more: $24,500 · OtherFLINT GLOBAL PARTNERS INC: $130,427 · InternationalFLINT GLOBAL P…LIVING HOPE INTERNATIONAL: $23,420 · InternationalLIVING HOPE IN…Baja Missions Inc: $15,000 · InternationalBaja Missions …CHINESE AGAPE FOUNDATION: $53,100 · Human ServicesOur Daughters International: $40,000 · Human ServicesJUVENTUD EN CAMINO ASSOCIATION: $5,000 · Human ServicesTENNESSEE PRISON OUTREACH MINISTRY INC: $60,000 · Crime & LegalAnchor Pointe Recovery Center Inc: $50,000 · Housing & Shelter
Other$981,179International$168,847Human Services$98,100Crime & Legal$60,000Housing & Shelter$50,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetRwanda Children: $270,410 over 4y, 9.7% of budgetFLINT GLOBAL PARTNERS INC: $130,427 over 1y, 7.8% of budgetTENNESSEE PRISON OUTREACH MINISTRY INC: $60,000 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetCHINESE AGAPE FOUNDATION: $53,100 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetAnchor Pointe Recovery Center Inc: $50,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetOur Daughters International: $40,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetLIVING HOPE INTERNATIONAL: $23,420 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetBaja Missions Inc: $15,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetJUVENTUD EN CAMINO ASSOCIATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Servant FoundationThe Signatry Charitab…Raymond James Charita…Chattanooga Christian…Natl Christian Charit…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
Servant FoundationKS19.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Servant Foundation · The Signatry Charitable Trust · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Chattanooga Christian Community Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Hope and Equip Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Hope and Equip Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Hope and Equip Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Hope and Equip Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 15 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Hope and Equip’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home