B E a M Against Domestic Violence Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 844545092
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- Maple Falls, WA, USA
- Phone
- 4252188745
- Rating
- 45
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,970
- Expenses
- $1,323
- Assets
- $1,190
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
People named in this filing
- Eduviges Rosa (Co-founder)
- Todd Mosher (Principal)
- Abigail Falcon-Rosa (Co-founder and Director)
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 primary focus of B.E.A.M. Against Domestic Violence Association is to provide survivors of domestic violence skills and training to re-enter the workforce. This is accomplished by providing skills in setting up an online profile for job search, designing a resume and providing protection solutions for the new workplace.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization in 2020 started its operations and provided service to 2 domestic violence survivors re-enter the workforce in 2023.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 7
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 5.6%; rating input score 6
- Program expense ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 8
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 32.8%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.9; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 33.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 38.5% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 41.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 5.6% of revenue deployed · 8.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $110 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 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 6/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 8/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.