Brunch N Bible Study Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 993878782
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Syracuse, NY, USA
- Phone
- 3156072856
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $102,553
- Expenses
- $23,110
- Assets
- $79,443
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
People named in this filing
- Nadia Nellons (Vice Chair - Board of Directors)
- Sakeena Anderson (Treasurer - Board of Directors)
- Jordan Davis (Secretary - Board of Directors)
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
Brunch N Bible Study, Inc. is a women-centered nonprofit advancing spiritual, mental, and physical wellness for underserved women in Syracuse, NY through trauma-informed programs, food security initiatives, and supportive services that strengthen stability and wellbeing.
What it reported doing in 2025
In June 2025, Brunch N Bible Study, Inc. went into partnership with Healthy Alliance, a social care network to improve the integration of health, behavioral health, and social care. Through this partnership, our organization offers free screenings to women who are Medicaid Members to help them identify unmet health-related social needs (HRSN's) such as housing instability, lack of transportation, and food insecurity, and then connect them to services to address those unmet needs. In 2025, we administered screenings for health related social needs to 72 women. Furthermore, 39 referrals were sent on behalf of our clients and 43 were engaged in enhanced care management with our organization.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% 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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 52
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 89
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 23.4%; rating input score 23
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 77.5%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.44; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 23.4% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $24K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 23/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.