Brooklyn Bridge Animal Welfare Coalition
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 261482964
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2011
- Location
- Brooklyn, NY, USA
- Phone
- 7183609918
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Animal Protection and Welfare
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,530,453
- Expenses
- $2,735,926
- Assets
- $7,493,235
- Liabilities
- $7,262,576
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MADELYN MCHUGH (PRESIDENT)
- ANNE LEVIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- SONJA CHAI (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $48,666 total reported compensation
- ANNE LEVIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $44,026 total reported compensation
- JULIA ROSENFELD (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $22,685 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 mission of brooklyn bridge animal welfare coalition (bbawc) is to empower people and communities to be more compassionate by experiencing a commitment to cat welfare. Specifically, our focus is to proactively address the root causes of cat homelessness and overpopulation in New York city. We do this through collaborative community engagement, providing access to education, support, and direct services, all demonstrated by our signature programs, the brooklyn cat caf and the bbawc rescue clinic.
What it reported doing in 2024
The bbawc operates the brooklyn cat cafe, a hip and inviting destination where cat lovers can interact with adoptable animals while learning about pet rescue and pet care. It is a central facility where rescuers, fosters families and potential adoptees can meet rescued cats in a cage-free, non-shelter environment. The brooklyn cat cafe is a volunteer-run organization, managed by the bbawc who oversees the business affairs, cat care regimen and daily cafe operations. It is also a resource center for animal rescuers, providing educational workshops and holding space for newly-rescued cats.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 67% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 77
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 99%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $12.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -8.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.74; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.97; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 36.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 21.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 29.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 99% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $49K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.