Community Bridge
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 454977670
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- West Liberty, IA, USA
- Phone
- 3196276026
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Emergency Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $60,741
- Expenses
- $20,536
- Assets
- $71,089
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Mindy Heick (President)
- Renee Wulf (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Mindy Heick (President)
- Renee Wulf (Vice President)
- Mark Visser (Treasurer)
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
The Community Bridge exists to provide support and to enhance the lives of deserving members of the West Liberty Foods family, which includes team members, their families and the communities in which they live, work and play. There are two areas of interest for the Community Bridge. The first area is the community in which we exist as a company. The foundation will be open to assisting community projects that make improvements to the community. The second area of interest is our team members and their families at WLF. Assistance for WLF team members is designed to provide short-term, emergency support to team members or their eligible dependents who are facing serious financial hardship and who cannot afford basic everyday living expenses as a result of their unpreventable circumstances.
What it reported doing in 2025
In Tax Year 2025, Community Bridge provided over $11,000 of donations to those in financial need in our community, by giving to 12 individuals and their families. Community Bridge also helped fund other programs and initiatives, giving over $4,500 to 5 other nonprofit organizations in our service areas.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 66% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 81
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 66.2%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.46; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.