Bridge Support Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261501314
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4159891111
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$521,120
Expenses
$13,627
Assets
$28,055,528
Liabilities
$286,215

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KENNETH LOMBARD (PRESIDENT)
  • SIERRA ATILANO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES MATHER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA HLEBASKO (VICE PRESIDENT/SECRETARY)

Highest reported compensation

  • KENNETH LOMBARD (PRESIDENT): $1,112,594 total reported compensation
  • DELPHINE SHERMAN (EVP/CFO): $549,294 total reported compensation
  • SIERRA ATILANO (VICE PRESIDENT): $505,689 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Mission: this organization supports bridge housing corporation (bridge). Bridge strengthens communities by developing, owning and managing high-quality, affordable homes for working families and seniors.vision:* bridge strengthens communities and creates opportunities for working families and seniors, beginning but not ending with housing.* bridge is a leader and innovator in the mission-driven business of effective production, operation and ownership of affordable and mixed-income housing.* bridge earns the highest degree of customer satisfaction from all stakeholders, including residents, neighbors, investors, taxpayers, private- and public-sector partners, and employees.* bridge is the go-to developer and owner for public officials, investors and communities seeking an array of housing solutions, and it delivers results.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization serves to support bridge housing corporation, a nonprofit organization that provides affordable housing for low-income persons.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 29
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 2.2%; rating input score 2
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 97.4%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2,058.82; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3,123.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 2.2% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 228 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 2/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.