Berks Coalition to End Homelessness

Legal name: Berks Coalition to End Homelessness Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371575390
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Reading, PA, US
Phone
(610) 373-3112
Rating
92
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Homeless Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,363,617
Expenses
$1,462,297
Assets
$1,092,746
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAROLYN BAZIK (PRESIDENT)
  • RICHARD SCHLAMOWITZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN WILLIAMS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN WILLIAMS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $113,166 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To prevent and end homelessness in Berks County through coordinated community efforts.

What it reported doing in 2024

The coalition is the designated coc of berks county that applies for, monitors, collects data, establishes best practices, and acts as the coordinated entry site for fighting homelessness in berks county. They oversee permanent housing, housing and urban development (hud) programming and services, and strategic planning. The coalition also manages several low income properties, a family shelter, the local homeless management information system, street outreach, as well as other activities that are part of the collaborative effort of dozens of nonprofits, governmental agencies, and other berks county organizations. During fy2024-2025, there were 962 clients served.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 82% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.4%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 90.8%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,044.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.2%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 97.4% of revenue deployed · 90.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $113K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.