Bridge Refugee Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581505955
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Knoxville, TN, USA
Phone
4236536291
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,993,523
Expenses
$2,960,094
Assets
$1,065,051
Liabilities
$194,999

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARINA PESHTERIANU (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARINA PESHTERIANU (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $82,425 total reported compensation
  • NOAH MCBRAYER JONES (COMMUN AND DEVEL DIRECTOR): $55,542 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to provide opportunities for refugees to rebuild their lives after suffering persecution, so that they become productive, contributing members of the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization welcomes refugees and special immigrant visa holders (siv) upon their arrival in east Tennessee and facilitates their path to accelerated self-sufficiency through case management, providing basic needs (furnished housing, food, access to healthcare), cultural orientation, job readiness and placement, school enrollment, including english as a second language for adults and connecting them to communtity opportunities of growth giving back to their new community. Qualifying asylees benefit from the same programs. In 2024, bridge served 750 clients. The nationalities for both offices combined were afghanistan, belarus, colombia, cuba, democratic republic of congo, el salvador, guatemala, haiti, iraq, nicaragua, russia, south sudan, sudan, syria, venezuela and ukraine.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 86% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 53% for direct work, and 47% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 87.9%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $31.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th 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; 72nd 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: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.1%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.9% of revenue deployed · 87.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.