Day One New York Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061103000
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2125668120
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,572,449
Expenses
$4,076,804
Assets
$6,050,364
Liabilities
$2,442,826

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANNE PATTERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • LUCIA RIVIECCIO (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LUCIA RIVIECCIO (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $186,414 total reported compensation
  • ANNE PATTERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $149,177 total reported compensation
  • NATALIE RENTAS (DIRECTOR, INTERVENTION): $142,455 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Day one's mission is to partner with youth to end dating abuse and domestic violence through community education, supportive services, legal advocacy, and leadership development.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community education and leadership development - day one provides healthy relationship skill building training and violence prevention education to an audience of young new yorkers, under 24 years old, and supportive adults. Day one also facilitates youth leadership development work through the youth advisory board and summer peer leadership institute

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 70% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.9%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 78.3%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.8%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.48; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.9% of revenue deployed · 78.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 20 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $204K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.