Center City District Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232701217
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2154405500
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,640,895
Expenses
$3,732,891
Assets
$822,240
Liabilities
$536,797

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PREMA GUPTA (EX OFFICIO/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PREMA GUPTA (EX OFFICIO/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $323,057 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Plant philadelphia, park entertainment, dilworth lawn, dilworth plaza, sister cities, bike patrol, homeless outreach, bench programs-grants and contributions received by ccdf are used to initiate, test, and support public improvement initiatives of the ccd, support fundraising activities relating to parks managed by the ccd, raise funds for ccd's greening initiatives (plant! Philadelphia), and to inform the public about how to reduce homelessness in center city.

What it reported doing in 2024

Recovery fund - the worldwide covid pandemic resulted in significant impacts to daily life in center city philadelphia. To enhance the efforts of the city of philadelphia and center city district, the center city district foundation (ccdf) focused significant resources on efforts to help the city recover from it's devastating effects. Activities supported by ccdf include: enhanced security patrols throughout center city philadelphia via additional foot patrols and bike patrols to address concerns of businesses and residents regarding safety of the downtown area; services for homeless individuals on the street to assist them with shelter, additional services and the like; marketing efforts to bring workers back to the office including promotions and ads touting the benefits of center city philadelphia; activities to bring people into center city and research to help businesses navigate the return to process, also, ccdf helped fund recovery activities supported by other organizations as well, which focused on safety, security and promoting center city return to work.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.4%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.5%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.65; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.5%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $323K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $2M reported
  • Consistency: 44 of 44 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.