The Upper Darby Professional Fire Fighters Charitable Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
996162749
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Upper Darby, PA, USA
Phone
4846452055
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,000
Expenses
$28,259
Assets
$21,741

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MICHAEL J MCKENZIE (TREASURER)
  • RICHARD JERNEGAN (CHAIRMAN)
  • KENNETH COLLINS (TRUSTEE)

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

The upper darby professional firefighters charitable trust is established to operate exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational purposes as defined under section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code and in accordance with Pennsylvania trust law. The trust is authorized to accept property through gifts, bequests, or devises from individuals or entities, provided that such contributions do not impose conditions that would require distribution to non-charitable organizations or jeopardize the trust's tax-exempt status.

What it reported doing in 2024

The charitable trust of the upper darby professional firefighters is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization. It is dedicated to community outreach and fundraising for upper darby residents as well as other charitable organizations. They are known for organizing fundraising events, holding charity drives, and providing school supplies to local organizations, with a focus on giving back to the communities they serve. The organization is associated with the local iaff local 2493.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.7%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 76

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 43.5%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42.7% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $21K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.