Hamden Education Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300066472
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Hamden, CT, USA
Phone
2034072202
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$23,268
Expenses
$29,840
Assets
$197,877
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETER BONADIES (PRESIDENT)
  • KELSEY ODDO (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • PETER BONADIES (PRESIDENT)
  • KELSEY ODDO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHERYL CASTELLANO (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To form a bond between community members who care deeply about hamden students and the dedicated educators who teach them.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation awarded mini grants to several teachers in the hamden public schools for use in classroom activities. It also awarded several scholarships to students and donated funds to various educational and youth groups in the town of hamden.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 91% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 67.6%; rating input score 68

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -28.2%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.63; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.7% of revenue deployed · 67.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $20K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.