Bridge Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 814118089
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2020–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- Lincoln, NH, USA
- Phone
- 6033484009
- Rating
- 45
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $169,061
- Expenses
- $184,536
- Assets
- $139,449
- Liabilities
- $11,756
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Rory Parnell (President)
- Marcus Corey (Vice President)
- Tracy Shamberger (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Rory Parnell (President)
- Marcus Corey (Vice President)
- Roberta Vignault (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Bridge Project is a 501(c)(3) non-profit which began as a Rotary Club initiative. The goal was to provide a space where people could feel comfortable asking for help. Since its inception in 2016, The Bridge Project has grown to support hundreds of our community members through connecting them with individual and group support networks. Our primary work focuses on assisting at-risk individuals struggling with addiction, poverty, and other difficult life circumstances.
What it reported doing in 2025
Recovery Meetings
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 82% 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 and revenue has grown recently. 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: 1
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 25
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0.9%; rating input score 1
- Program expense ratio: 0.8%; rating input score 1
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: -9.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 37.1%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -13.9% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0.9% of revenue deployed · 0.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 1/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.