Jack Brewer Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562574991
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Plantation, FL, USA
Phone
6122828281
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,406,636
Expenses
$5,349,238
Assets
$2,166,151
Liabilities
$1,546,641

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JACK BREWER (FOUNDER/CHAIR): $75,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Since 2006, the jack brewer foundation (jbf) both directly and through affilate partners helped populations in the united states and around the world combat extreme poverty and human rights challenges using biblical principles. Jbf does not charge for its services, but rather relies on donations and grants to fund its operations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Jbf expanded its second chance programs throughout the state of Florida, which focuses on the rehabilitation of those who have been incarcerated. The programs teach those effected on how to become productive members of society and good fathers or mothers. Estimated expenses $3,000,000 annually

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 76% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.9%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 55.3%; rating input score 55; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.1%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.4; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.71; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.9% of revenue deployed · 84.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.