Home Run Baseball Camp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521927974
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2022378311
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Baseball, Softball

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$797,877
Expenses
$887,477
Assets
$66,724
Liabilities
$1,118

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN MCCARTHY (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN MCCARTHY (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT): $225,798 total reported compensation
  • TIMOTHY GOINS (TREASURER/DIRECTOR OF OPER): $50,846 total reported compensation
  • ANTTONIO BROWN (DIRECTOR): $400 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 home run baseball camp, inc. ("hrbc") is: (1) provide school aged children of diverse socioeconomic backgrounds the opportunity to learn and play a team sport in an environment that above all teaches and stresses the values of good citizenship, sportsmanship, hustle, competitive energy, team cooperation, safety, education, environmental responsibility, and respect for others; (2) to give this opportunity to children of financially needy families by granting, to the extent possible, full or partial scholarships to all who request such support; (3) to train and offer paid seasonal employment to older youth from all socioeconomic backgrounds to learn the craft of coaching and be positive role models for the campers; and (4) where possible, to assist other charitable organizations that share hrbc's values.

What it reported doing in 2024

Worked with approximately 1,000 school aged children using baseball as a vehicle to teach citizenship, sportsmanship and team cooperation. Camp revenue is collected in the spring and summer.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 94.8%; rating input score 95; 42nd 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.2%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.2%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $820K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $226K · 9 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.