Big Brotherbig Sister of the Great River Area

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421474963
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Keokuk, IA, USA
Phone
3195263944
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Big Brothers, Big Sisters

Reported finances

Revenue
$82,859
Expenses
$109,925
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHEENA BEALE (PRESIDENT)
  • ANTHONY BEALE (PRESIDENT ELECT)

People named in this filing

  • SHEENA BEALE (PRESIDENT)
  • ANTHONY BEALE (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • dAVID WENDT (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of big brother/big sister is to enlist responsible adult volunteers to establish a relationship with a child through a variety of activities.

What it reported doing in 2015

The purpose of big brother/big sister is to enlist responsible adult volunteers to establish a relationship with a child through a variety of activities, the volunteer provides friendship to the child and serves as a positive role model. With the guidance of a professional case manager and the support of the parent, the volunteer enhances the emotional stability, social development and self-esteem of the child.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -32.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -150% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -42.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2012 to 2015
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.