The Jerome Bettis Bus Stops Here Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383378049
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Southfield, MI, USA
Phone
4127205195
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$758,922
Expenses
$589,648
Assets
$333,859
Liabilities
$41,157

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BETHANY VIETMEIER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BETHANY VIETMEIER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $100,000 total reported compensation
  • GLORIA BETTIS (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $62,433 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 jerome bettis bus stops here foundation is working to provide education, sports, technology, and recreational opportunities to the underprivileged youth of the inner-city. We aim to help them improve their quality of life through our mentoring and programs to become enlightened, healthy, skilled, and productive individuals.

What it reported doing in 2024

The jerome bettis foundation youth empowerment programs collectively provide safe, supportive, and innovative learning environments for underprivileged and inner-city youth, with a focus on education, technology, character development, and workforce readiness. Through hands-on stem initiatives, computer literacy and digital education via the cyber bus, innovation-focused learning experiences, and community-centered programs that promote self-esteem, responsibility, and caring citizenship, the foundation works to eliminate barriers faced by underserved youth. These programs equip participants with critical academic, technical, and life skills, foster creativity and innovation, encourage parental involvement, and expand access to higher education and future career opportunitiesparticularly in stem and technology-related fieldsultimately strengthening economic mobility and community impact.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 22
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 21.2%; rating input score 21
  • Program expense ratio: 27.3%; rating input score 27
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 74.4%; rating input score 74; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 15th 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: Fail
    • 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: 22.3%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 21.2% of revenue deployed · 27.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $161K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 30 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.