Kingdom Causes, Inc.
Legal name: Kingdom Causes Inc City Net Bedrock Creek
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 571162424
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Anaheim, CA, United States
- Phone
- 6575541074
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $41,663,102
- Expenses
- $37,243,014
- Assets
- $16,197,481
- Liabilities
- $6,185,756
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRADLEY FIELDHOUSE (PRESIDENT, CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- BRADLEY FIELDHOUSE (PRESIDENT, CEO): $221,497 total reported compensation
- MATTHEW BATES (CHIEF OPERATIONS OFFICER): $189,662 total reported compensation
- JESSICA BRUCE (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER): $170,007 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Kingdom Causes, Inc. (KCI) is a nonprofit organization that partners with existing entities to address complex social issues through prevention, intervention, and restoration. Through collaborative leadership, we help these partnerships achieve better results than otherwise would have been possible. We develop resources and funding, facilitate partnerships, and strategize together for the maximization of positive impact in our communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
In 2024, in fulfillment of the organizational mission to bring non-profits and funders together, to address complex social issues through prevention, intervention, and restoration, and to collaborate for social good & building healthy, sustainable communities for future generations, kci (dba city net): (1.) collaborative community leadership and influence - kci/city net participated in and/or led many community meetings, presentations to city staff, county staff, & elected officials, and tours of city net operated sites. Through these, kci/city net engaged thousands of stakeholders across the state in critical dialogues about national evidence-based best practices around solutions to homelessness and their underlying conditions (housing, jobs, etc). Future plans are to continue community collaborations and dialogues for the expansion of best practices throughout the state of California.(2.) homeless services - kci/city net operated at no cost to clients, 86 programs throughout 88 cities in 6 counties, within the state of California. Through these efforts, city net engaged and interacted with 39,798 individual clients and provided services to 17,199 individuals (of these 17,199, we received the following self-identifications: 315 veterans, 78,713 disabled individuals, 5,336 chronically homeless individuals, and 709 families). Moreover, city net assisted 4,477 people to exit street-level homelessness; helped 983 individuals secure and move into permanent housing; operated 5 non-congregate shelter navigation centers; provided 232,257 shelter bed nights; served 364,749 meals; operated 40 detached houses providing emergency shared housing to individuals; facilitated 4,380 hours of volunteer service; and conducted 7 community homeless censuses to help cities gain accurate and informed insight into the state of homelessness in their respective municipalities. (3.) since 2022, our catalyst team in santa barbara has facilitated the anti-human trafficking community collaboration in partnership with the santa barbara human trafficking task force. In 2024, as part of our newly developed three-year strategic plan, we focused our efforts on prevention education in schools and the broader community, recognizing that the far-reaching impacts of the commercial sexual exploitation of children (csec) can be reduced through early identification. With the support of subject matter experts, we conducted 16 trainings for students, educators, community members, and countywide agencies. Additionally, we engaged 30 lompoc-based organizations in a new coalition, the lompoc neighborhood action collaborative, and developed six first responder tools that are now being utilized by countywide partners to better identify and support potential trafficking survivors.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 95% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 81
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 82.1%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 91.9%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: $59.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 97.1%; rating input score 97; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.6%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.4%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 30.7% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 30.3% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 33.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 82.1% of revenue deployed · 91.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $34.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $221K · 13 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.