Bridge Meadows

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202028975
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
5039531100
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,024,617
Expenses
$2,165,985
Assets
$12,027,508
Liabilities
$442,427

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DERENDA SCHUBERT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DERENDA SCHUBERT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $173,601 total reported compensation
  • MARYAM BOLOURI (CFO): $66,390 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Bridge meadows' mission is to develop and sustain supportive intergenerational communities for families of children who have experienced foster care that promotes permanency, community, and caring relationships, while offering safety and meaningful purpose in the daily lives of older adults.

What it reported doing in 2024

In november 2021, bridge meadows proudly welcomed home new residents to our third intergenerational housing community in redmond, Oregon replicating our other programs in north portland and beaverton, increasing the number of children, parents, and elders to be served across three sites.bridge meadows offers a powerful alternative to the isolation, trauma, and adversity that too many foster youth, their adoptive families, and low- income elders endure. Our "whole community" approach leverages the power of place, permanence, and shared social purpose to improve residents' housing stability, access to health resources, educational attainment, and community connection. It begins with the grounding roots of a physical environment to call home, and this threshold to permanence sets the stage for former foster youth succeed in school, for adoptive parents to build parenting skills and stable families, and for elders of modest means to age in place and stay healthy, their lives filled with purpose. Together, all three generations build resilience and improved health and wellness.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.9%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 53.9%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.55; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.1%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.9% of revenue deployed · 53.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 18 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.