Kalamazoo Bridge Club
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 814171268
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Kalamazoo, MI, USA
- Phone
- 2692903133
- Rating
- 36
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Recreational l Clubs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $45,063
- Expenses
- $45,290
- Assets
- $48,718
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WILLIAM NORTHROP (PRESIDENT)
- EMILY SUBERS (VICE-PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- WILLIAM NORTHROP (PRESIDENT)
- JEFFREY M ORWIN (TREASURER)
- RUTH SUBERS (SECRETARY)
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 club will promote bridge in southwestern lower Michigan and provide an environment for organized bridge games and local and regional tournaments. The club will offer duplicate bridge games sanctioned by the acbl various times each week. The club will also offer bridge instruction classes to promote bridge to new players and also provide bridge instruction classes to promote bridge to new players
What it reported doing in 2025
The club promoted bridge in southwestern lower Michigan and offered local and regional tournaments sanctioned by the acbl various times each week. The club also provided bridge instruction and classes prior to scheduled games to promote bridge to new players.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 82
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 20
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: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.5%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.08; rating input score 49; 49th 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: -8.8% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
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 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2017 to 2025
- 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 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.