Episcopal Charities of the Diocese of New York

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133902908
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2022885622
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,735,932
Expenses
$1,573,554
Assets
$8,005,988
Liabilities
$160,460

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREW HORROCKS (PRESIDENT)
  • PETER W KELLER (PRESIDENT THROUGH 1/24)
  • REV KEVIN VANHOOK II (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • THE REV MATTHEW F HEYD (BISHOP): $377,781 total reported compensation
  • LAUREN JENKINS CHUNG (DIRECTOR OF INSITITUTIONAL): $114,915 total reported compensation
  • REV KEVIN VANHOOK II (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $112,249 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Episcopal charities (ec) unites over 100 outreach programs to support nyc and hudson valley communities. Our grant funding and operational support are allocated to non-sectarian partner programs based at or connected to the episcopal diocese of New York parishes. Ec is committed to developing and expanding innovative programs to meet the communities' needs quickly and effectively.

What it reported doing in 2024

Bulk buy and farm to pantry: in response to growing food access demand, episcopal charities (ec) operates two innovative programs: bulk buy and farm to pantry. With the bulk buy program, we empower food pantry partners to purchase culturally relevant foods at a reduced price, which we negotiate with food wholesalers. Through farm to pantry, we address the need for nutritious fresh foods that may not be readily available from food banks. By partnering with local farmers, we can grow and provide vegetables and proteins specific to each program's unique community needs, at a comparable cost to wholesale purchases. These initiatives exemplify ec's commitment to finding creative solutions for enhanced food security.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 68% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.2%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 70.3%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 90.5%; rating input score 90; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 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: 42.5%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.09; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.2% of revenue deployed · 70.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $378K · 29 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 39 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 38 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.