B'nai B'rith Apartments
Legal name: B'nai B'rith Covenant House of Peoria
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 510177950
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Peoria, IL, USA
- Phone
- 309-676-0041
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,809,802
- Expenses
- $3,672,669
- Assets
- $2,940,945
- Liabilities
- $6,595,655
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHAEL STONE (PRESIDENT)
- CRAIG FENTON MD (VICE-PRESIDENT)
- DONNA PATRICK (VICE-PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- MICHAEL STONE (PRESIDENT)
- CRAIG FENTON MD (VICE-PRESIDENT)
- STEVE VOGEL (SECRETARY)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of the organization is to provide low rent housing to the elderly and handicapped.
B'nai B'rith Apartments provides well-maintained, affordable senior housing in downtown Peoria, Illinois, with two communities—Phase I and Phase II. The properties are designed for independent adults age 62 and over (and those 18+ with mobility impairments) and offer 1- and 2-bedroom apartments with secure building access, interior hallways, on-site management, and common areas for social connection. Rent is set at approximately 30% of adjusted monthly income under a HUD agreement for low-income seniors.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 72% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 82.6%; rating input score 83
- Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.6%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.24; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 82.6% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.5M reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.