Brothers and Sisters Emerging

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262729390
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4124042250
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$428,275
Expenses
$516,773
Assets
$105,256
Liabilities
$69,190

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT M JONES JR (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT M JONES JR (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $103,650 total reported compensation
  • WENDY GUY (FISCAL AND DEVELOPMENT MAN): $71,769 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Nature of activities - brothers and sisters emerging (b.a.s.e) (the organization") is a unique organization in the city of pittsburgh in that it has evolved from a youth football and cheerleading program into a year-round organization offering after-school, summer camp and mentoring programs to youth. We also offer a post-secondary college preparatory and career education program. By transitioning into a full-year, volunteer and staffed program, the organization has evolved into building positive relationships through advocacy, social supports and sports and empowerment. Our mission is to strategically advocate and connect youth of promise and families to life sustaining resources. B.a.s.e. Takes a holistic, interactive and community driven approach to strategically advocated for youth and families. Additionally, we connect them to life sustaining resources that will enhance them socially, emotionally, educationally and economically for future outcomes.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization provided an after-school program for youths ages 7 through 17, a group and one-on-one mentoring program for male youths, and a group for young females. A summer day camp is offered to youth from july through august to further the efforts of the after-school program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 66% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - 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: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.6%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 77.6%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20.7%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.2; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.66; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.6% of revenue deployed · 77.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $401K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.