Building Families for Children Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463006084
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Columbia, MD, USA
Phone
4108721050
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Children's, Youth Services
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,448,186
Expenses
$1,805,077
Assets
$1,834,326
Liabilities
$1,352,414

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR STEVE BURNETT (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TRICIA A SAKLES (EXECUTIVE DI): $119,526 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Founded in 1920 by mccormick spice company's entrepreneur willoughby mccormick, building families for children (bfc), formerly baptist family & children's services, exists to prove a safe, nurturing family for ever child and a supportive, thriving community for every family. Our mission is to share the love of christ by helping Maryland's most vulnerable children thrive in families.

What it reported doing in 2024

Safe families for children mobilizes a network of compassionate volunteers to wrap around families facing crisis. While some volunteers temporarily provide housing for children, others step in to mentor parents and help them achieve their goal. These supportive relationships provide the safety net many vulnerable families need to keep children out of the foster care system and achieve long-term stability. Many families today are isolated, they may not have anyone to call when difficult circumstances arise, leaving them vulnerable. This is where safe families can step in. Volunteers provide a safe, nurturing home for children, allowing parents to focus on crisis situations without worrying about losing parental custody, while providing an extra layer of support as parents work toward stability.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -24.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.02; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.74; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 9 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $140K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.