Benedictine Society of Baltimore City Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
520613680
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4109474988
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$431,115
Expenses
$372,385
Assets
$351,884
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Rt Rev Martin Bartel (President)
  • Charlene Sola (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Rt Rev Martin Bartel (President)
  • Charlene Sola (Vice President)
  • Philip Kanfush (Treasurer)

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 mission of the Benedictine Society of Baltimore City is to serve the people of Southwest Baltimore by addressing food insecurity through a community-based food pantry and preserving the neighborhoods historic Catholic site as a center of cultural architectural and spiritual significance. The organization also maintains a low-powered FM radio station with programming of interest for the surrounding neighborhood.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Benedictine Society of Baltimore City maintains a lot made available for the communitys public use Saint Benedict Neighborhood Center lot project. The lot is currently undergoing clearing and landscaping. BSBC has solicited the local community for their input on the lot and how to configure the property for local community usage and additional greenspace in a heavily urban environment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 72% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 6
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 6.3%; rating input score 6
  • Program expense ratio: 7.3%; rating input score 7
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.6%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.94; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 6.3% of revenue deployed · 7.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $27K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 43 current checks pass · 8 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 7/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLegal column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticIndividuals column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.