Catholic Big Brothers Big Sisters Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
951690972
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2132519800
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$641,780
Expenses
$1,194,180
Assets
$488,237
Liabilities
$455,357

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KENNETH E MARTINET (PRESIDENT/CEO)

People named in this filing

  • JOE BOSKOVICH JR (Co-Chair)
  • JOE BARATTA (MEMBER)
  • JIM CARMACK (Co-Chair)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Catholic Big Brothers Big Sisters pairs youth in-need and volunteers of all faiths and backgrounds in one-to-one professionally suported mentoring relationships to help them academically and in life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Catholic big brothers big sisters, inc. Established in 1925, is a 501c3 nonprofit organization whose mission is to transform lives through rewarding and enriching relationships between trained mentors and youth of all beliefs and identities throughout los angeles county. Cbbbs has developed a broad spectrum of partnership programs and services over the years that focus on the needs of children between ages of seven and eighteen who are living in mostly single-parent families, including foster children. Cbbbs offers one-to-one community mentoring programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: -86.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.93; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 33 of 33 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $921K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.