Black Resiliency Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
991842203
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Chico, CA, USA
Phone
5309077882
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$189,193
Expenses
$129,504
Assets
$5,590
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Rachel Morton (Chief Operations Officer)
  • Robert Morton (Director of Policy)
  • Jennifer Lang (Director of Advocacy)

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

To provide culturally grounded substance use recovery support, case management, and community economic empowerment to Black and underserved communities in Northern California.

What it reported doing in 2025

Substance Use Recovery & Life Saving Services BRP provided culturally grounded peer navigation, harm reduction education, and connection to substance use treatment and recovery resources for Black and underserved community members in Butte County through the SOR IV and MAT programs in partnership with Sierra Health Foundation and the Center for Healthy Communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filed totals do not add up and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.2%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 92.3%; rating input score 92

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: 31.5%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 79.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.2% of revenue deployed · 92.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $120K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part I part ii net assets crosscheck did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.