Celtic Fc Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 320602538
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Boston, MA, USA
- Phone
- 6176462000
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $594,238
- Expenses
- $770,807
- Assets
- $1,214,424
- Liabilities
- $488,745
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANTHONY HAMILTON (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- HAZEL WILSON (TREASURER): $55,063 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Celtic fc foundation continues to uphold and promote the charitable principles and heritage of celtic football club. Our aim is to help those living in poverty through a range of initiatives targeting hunger, employability, social inclusion and education. The foundation's ethos is typified by a determination to create opportunities for society's most vulnerable and marginalised groups - principally, we address root causes of poverty by equipping individuals with the tools and means to reverse inequality. Charity is fundamental to celtic's identity, and as the club's charitable arm, we recognise the enormous importance and responsibility of honouring the legacy of our founding father, brother walfrid. The foundation's work encompasses a diverse variety of groups, with our work promoting employability, health and wellbeing, diversionary activities and disability sports initiatives.
What it reported doing in 2024
Primary activities: alongside New York-based charity partners, celtic fc foundation deliver a bespoke programme of diversionary activity for disadvantaged youth groups in New York city and support homeless feeding initiatives. Client group: children aged 3-13 years (and their families) living in poverty in targeted high-needs New York city neighborhoods. Homeless families and adults delivery method: building on the success of similar activities, we would bring celtic fc foundation to deliver engaging activities for both children and their families. Feeding project will serve meals, also providing snacks and assistance to school-aged children and their family members. Delivery in: New York and harlem
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 61% for direct work, and 39% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 96
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.2%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 71.1%; rating input score 71
- Fundraising efficiency: $2.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 97.7%; rating input score 98; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: -29.7%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.58; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: 48.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 30.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 92.2% of revenue deployed · 71.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $548K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $55K · 5 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $175K reported
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.