Bam Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462792809
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2020
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Claymont, DE, USA
Phone
3027656001
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Food Programs

Reported finances

Expenses
$12,008
Assets
$45,109
Liabilities
$10,794

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GLENN W CLARK (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GLENN W CLARK (PRESIDENT)
  • MARK JALOVICK (BOARD MEMBER)
  • ART VALLELEY (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission and purpose of bam center will be to coordinate and house missionary team, ministries and individuals to provide services and resources to those individuals in need.

What it reported doing in 2020

Bam center was organized exclusivley for missionary and religious purposes. Specificially, the mission and purpose of bam center will be to coordinate and house missionary teams, ministries and individuals to provide services and resources to those individuals who are in need. Additionally, bam center will facilicate teams to work on projects in the villages to enhance the productivity, sustainability and transformative development of desolate communities. The bam center, ultimate purpose is to glorify god in all that we do.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.76; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -45.6% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: -25.8% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 4 of 4 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2018 to 2020
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.