Bellevue Literary Review Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 851666012
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 9299255401
- Rating
- 90
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Printing, Publishing
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $195,467
- Expenses
- $287,786
- Assets
- $113,971
- Liabilities
- $19,465
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
People named in this filing
- DANIELLE OFRI (Executive Dir.)
- BETTINA KLEIN (Chairman)
- MARIT VAGSTAD (Vice Chair)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Bellevue Literary Reviews (BLR) uses storytelling, poetry, and the arts to explore experiences of illness and health. BLR publishes a biannual literary journal and produces events and programming on these themes.
What it reported doing in 2025
Bellevue Literary Review (BLR) is a literary arts organization that uses storytelling, poetry, and the arts to explore experiences of illness and health. In 2025, BLR published two issues of its flagship literary journal and produced events and programming on these themes.
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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 15
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 79.7%; rating input score 80
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -47.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.4; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 45.1% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 79.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $229K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.