Knights of Columbus Charities USA Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
412140273
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New Haven, CT, USA
Phone
2037524000
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,135,781
Expenses
$3,755,622
Assets
$93,392,001
Liabilities
$15,480,418

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CARL A ANDERSON (DIRECTOR/PAST PRESIDENT)
  • PATRICK E KELLY (PRESIDENT)
  • ARTHUR LOUIS L PETERS (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PATRICK E KELLY (PRESIDENT): $1,901,587 total reported compensation
  • JOHN J KENNEDY (DIRECTOR/CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $924,817 total reported compensation
  • JOHN A MARRELLA (SECRETARY): $844,946 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Charities USA is operated exclusively for religious, charitable, educational and scientific purposes. In furtherance of these purposes, charities USA has established centers for the dissemination of the truths of christianity; maintains facilities for the proper physical, intellectual and moral development of youth; and administers scholarship funds for the benefit of deserving persons. Knights of columbus, through its members, provides donations which are placed under the control of charities USA.

What it reported doing in 2024

Regarding lines 4a through 4d: knights of columbus charities, inc. Transferred assets, liabilities and net assets to knights of columbus charities USA, inc. Effective january 1, 2005. Knights of columbus charities USA, inc. Administers these funds as part of its supportive role of knights of columbus charities, inc. In furtherance of knights of columbus charities, inc.'s exempt purpose and in fulfillment of its program service accomplishments.the catholic information program - see schedule o

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 49
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.3%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 91.2%; rating input score 91; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 12.5%; rating input score 12; 6th 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: -19.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.87; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.9M · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $934K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 23 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 26 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 12/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.