The Bridge Ministry
Legal name: The Bridge Ministry Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 541820614
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Charlttesville, VA, United States
- Phone
- 434-969-2991
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Religion Related N.E.C.
- Affiliation
- Religious (unspecified)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,711,352
- Expenses
- $890,876
- Assets
- $4,198,739
- Liabilities
- $610,194
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- WILLIAM WASHINGTON (EXECUTIVE DI): $51,333 total reported compensation
- JOHN JAMES JR (BOARD CHAIRP): $18,333 total reported compensation
- JOYCE WASHINGTON (SECRETARY): $18,333 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Bridge Ministry works in Virginia to transform the lives of troubled men and their families by providing mentoring, vocational skills, education, counseling, and the relationships they need to bridge the gap from addiction to productive community and family life. The Bridge Ministry has working relationships with communities and correctional facilities across the country, and also works with judges to provide an alternative to incarceration. Buckingham Campus- Phase 2 Community and Jail Ministry - Phase 1. The Bridge operates a retreat center in Buckingham County that can accommodate 50 men who struggle with life-controlling issues. During the eighteen-month program, men receive character building instruction, job training, drug counseling, and educational classes. The schedule is highly structured and teaches the students important life skills they need to live a productive...
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization is a 12-18 month inpatient treatment center that serves men dealing with the life controlling issues of addiction and addictive behavior. We provide them with evidence based behavorioral health programming, moral reconation therapy, seeking safety, the matrix, counseling, academic education and vocational training through piedmont Virginia and other community colleges.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. 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: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 77
- Sustainability: 77
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 48.1%; rating input score 48
- Program expense ratio: 92.5%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: $256.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 47.9%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.71; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 48.1% of revenue deployed · 92.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $824K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $51K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- 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 48/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.