Cypress Hills Local Development Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 112683663
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Brooklyn, NY, USA
- Phone
- (718) 647-2800
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Community, Neighborhood Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $33,123,244
- Expenses
- $25,228,831
- Assets
- $54,308,301
- Liabilities
- $26,481,932
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
27 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHAEL LAWES (PRESIDENT)
- MICHELLE NEUGEBAUER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHELLE NEUGEBAUER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $238,363 total reported compensation
- EMILY N VAN INGEN (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $229,446 total reported compensation
- GAUDI POLANCO-MENDOZA (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $187,691 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To create and preserve affordable housing, build community wealth, and advance racial and economic justice in Cypress Hills, East New York, and beyond.
What it reported doing in 2024
United community centers in fy25, chldc welcomed the staff, several former board members and the programs of a sister settlement house, united community centers (ucc) to the cypress hills local development corporation family. Through a legal merger, the former independent not-for-profit organization, ucc is now a division of chldc. We have retained ucc's staff and services and are deepening our collective impact and reach across east New York. We now run an early learning center for 60 toddlers and preschoolers. The child care center creates a learning environment that represents the diversity of our city and teaches children to live with one another and develop an understanding of themselves and of their world. We serve young children, ages 2 to 5 years with school day and extended day licensed child care and nutritious meals. We design exciting and cultural authentic learning environments, use standards-based instructional strategies and assessment tools. Another former ucc initiative that chldc now offers is protecting the east (pte), a peer leadership sexual health education and reproductive justice program. Pte promotes healthy relationships among youth and young adults in east New York, a historically underserved bipoc neighborhood. Pte utilizes various intervention strategies, including 10-15 paid peer educators ages 16-21 engaging other young people in sexual health conversations in street outreach and community events, a comprehensive social media and marketing outreach campaign, tailored and curated education sessions/workshops at local schools and health clinics; distribution of over 113,000 condoms, 100 at-home HIV testing kits, and 1000+ pregnancy and sti tests and plan b annually; and engage with 13,000 people in-person at a series of community events aimed at bringing further attention to sexual health, HIV prevention, healthy relationships, and reproductive justice.lastly, we are proud to now sponsor east New York farms! Project (enyf) which is an urban agriculture and food justice project. Now entering its 28th year, enyf's mission is to organize youth and adult residents to address food justice in our community by promoting local sustainable agriculture and community-led economic development. Our goal is to leverage local resources to empower residents to address their needs through a revitalization strategy that increases community food security, promotes health, and supports the preservation of natural resources. Our program includes: 16 youth in a paid agricultural internship; 200+ adults in the gardener network; one half acre urban farm; a youth-run farmers' market with 15-18 vendors every saturday from the end of june through early november; and the eny compost project.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and liabilities are high compared with assets.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 67
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59.1%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 77%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: $51.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 23.8%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.15; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.49; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 18.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 59.1% of revenue deployed · 77% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $19.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $238K · 27 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $397K reported
- Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 30 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.