The Bridge of Hope

Legal name: The Bridge of Community and Hope

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262821107
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Maple Valley, WA, USA
Phone
206.719.3653
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$865,743
Expenses
$830,777
Assets
$1,848,944
Liabilities
$48,742

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHAD KARLEWICZ (PRESIDENT)
  • KEVIN CASTLEMAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JEFF BAILEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEFF BAILEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $84,000 total reported compensation
  • LINDA NELSON (MEMBER): $8,450 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Bridge of Hope is a Christian nonprofit that serves communities in Sierra Leone, West Africa, through child and teacher sponsorship, church planting, medical and dental clinics, farming projects, and programs to prevent female genital mutilation and treat snakebites.

What it reported doing in 2025

Send humanitarian aid that allows for various construction projects in makeni including new school and church facilities, benevolence payments for medical care, and training for teachers. Send aid that provides for uniforms for students in makama and makambo communities and funded feeding programs that fed approximately 1,000 children 3-5 times per week in the communities. Support the pastors and teachers in these communities. Running three schools holding approximately 1,300 students (400 of which are sponsored by our donors).

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.5%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.23; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 4 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 78.5% of revenue deployed · 80.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $667K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.