Boys & Girls Clubs of Metropolitan Baltimore
Legal name: The Boys and Girls Clubs of Metropolitan Baltimore
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 264371125
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Baltimore, MD, US
- Phone
- (410) 637-3838
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Human Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $16,372,841
- Expenses
- $6,774,815
- Assets
- $54,005,993
- Liabilities
- $17,733,766
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
23 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JEFFREY BRESLIN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- Y'LANDA BURCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & LEAD)
- JESSE SCHAEFER (VICE PRESIDENT, DEVELOPMENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JEFFREY BRESLIN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $193,840 total reported compensation
- VANESSA LYON (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $154,971 total reported compensation
- Y'LANDA BURCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & LEAD): $135,197 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens.
What it reported doing in 2024
The boys and girls clubs of metropolitan baltimore (bgcmb) provides youth development programs/services for young people, especially those who need us most, ages 6-18. We support young people's development by providing: 1) environments that are safe, positive and inclusive, 2) relationships in which youth forge supportive, meaningful and healthy connections with adults and peers, and 3) experiences that build upon their strengths, foster a sense of belonging and purpose, and provide opportunities to lead. We believe every kid has what it takes, and by providing a world-class club experience, we ensure success is within reach of every young person who enters our doors, with all members on track to graduate with a plan for the future, demonstrating good character and citizenship, and living a healthy lifestyle.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 48
- Transparency & Controls: 96
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 78
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 31.4%; rating input score 31
- Program expense ratio: 68.8%; rating input score 69
- Fundraising efficiency: $35.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: 58.6%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.97; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 31.3% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 44.5% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 31.4% of revenue deployed · 68.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $194K · 23 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $4.4M reported
- Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 9 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.