Bcmw Community Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
370899785
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Centralia, IL, USA
Phone
6185323667
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonprofit Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,143,974
Expenses
$12,982,813
Assets
$2,354,931
Liabilities
$1,435,230

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JESSICA BACKS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JESSICA BACKS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $112,948 total reported compensation
  • CARRIE GORDON (DEPUTY FISCAL OFFICER 1): $73,641 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Act as the community action agency for the counties of bond, clinton, marion and Washington

What it reported doing in 2024

Project bread - total meals provided during the fy25 the period of 7/1/2024-6/30/2025 were 37,763. Out of those 37,763 meals, there were 11,756 congregate meals eaten at the congregate sites, 25,046 were home delivered, and 961 were picked up meals. Pick up meals are no longer countered separately; they are counted as congregate per midland. Shelf stable meals were received and distributed in july 2024, 300 were ordered, and our centralia meal site received 165, and our salem meal site received 135. From nov 1st of 2024, through january of 2025 our program was closed due to a federal funding issue, and when we were able to reopen, we were only operating on mon, wed, fri until feb of 2026, so our totals are significantly lower than previous years, but once we could reopen we are back to operating 5 days a week at both sites.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 86% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - 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: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.9%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 91.5%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.61; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.9% of revenue deployed · 91.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $11.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $113K · 16 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $712K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.