Dutchess County Pride Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831955663
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Poughkeepsie, NY, USA
Phone
8453371400
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$240,200
Expenses
$161,708
Assets
$147,576
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Karen Marder (Executive Director)
  • Shannon Johns (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Karen Marder (Executive Director): $15,626 total reported compensation
  • Alexander Johns (Director): $4,630 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Dutchess County Pride Center is a safe space for LGBTQ+ individuals and their families, including youth, to meet and socialize. Our goal is to improve the health, safety and well-being of the entire LGBTQ+ community in Dutchess County through advocacy, education, and support.

What it reported doing in 2025

Teen Drop-In program. Youth do not have to be a member of the LGBTQ+ community to participate. This program is open to any teenager who wants to come. The program offers any and all youth who come a safe, fun, and productive space for them to meet friends, work on projects for school or other purposes, and relax with fun and games in a free social setting. This is accomplished in various ways such as a Friday night evening open drop in, weekend daytime crafts projects, and various other free social events for teens. We do not discriminate on who attends our programs.

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 99% 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 - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.8%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 57.6%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.7%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.5%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 50% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 36.5% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.8% of revenue deployed · 57.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $67K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $16K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 39/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.