Friends of New York City Nurse Family Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474519333
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2015
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
9174262695
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$389,558
Expenses
$429,949
Assets
$168,588
Liabilities
$250

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HENRY MASCIA (PRESIDENT)
  • ELLEN COHEN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KARIN ROMANS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KARIN ROMANS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $90,000 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 improve the lives mothers and babies by supporting the New York city nurse-family partnership program (nyc nfp)through financial assistance to enable mothers' self-sufficiency, increase social and community connections, and provide professional development for nurses.

What it reported doing in 2024

Heart's desire awards - the heart's desire fund makes it possible for vulnerable mothers to pursue post-secondary education. The organization reviews essays from interested mothers and letters of recommendation from their nurses, and then channels money from donors to pay tuition and necessary additional resources such as metro cards, laptops, books and short-term child care. By removing the financial obstacles that face these moms, donors empower them to gain the education that will launch them on a career path and break the cycle of poverty. Financial assistance also reduces their stress, freeing them to devote their emotional energy and attention to their children during the critical, earliest years.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 64% for direct work, and 36% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.1%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 64.8%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 62.5%; rating input score 63; 44th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.9%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.1% of revenue deployed · 64.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $279K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $90K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.