The Bridge Golf Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473020315
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6464537488
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,297,655
Expenses
$1,441,036
Assets
$5,827,443
Liabilities
$476,931

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Tyler J Lower (Golf Professional): $161,274 total reported compensation
  • Michael S Sweeney (Board Member): $159,875 total reported compensation
  • Meghan A Costello (Program & Events Coord.): $112,500 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 bridge golf foundation is a non-profit organization with a mission to use the game of golf to improve life outcomes for young men of color.

What it reported doing in 2024

The bridge golf foundation ("bgf") is a sports-based youth development program based in harlem and centered around golf. Underserved young men of color grades 8 through 12 attend daily after school sessions which combine academic support and character education with indoor golf on simulators and regular visits to area golf courses. Bgf also runs a summer internship program at the bridge, a golf course on long island.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 89
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.5%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 72.6%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: 37.3%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.04; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.5% of revenue deployed · 72.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $161K · 12 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.