Heritage of Pride Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 133299634
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2128077433
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Intergroup, Race Relations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,102,067
- Expenses
- $2,891,352
- Assets
- $1,884,631
- Liabilities
- $514,117
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- SANDRA PEREZ (EXECUTIVE DIR. (THRU 1/25)): $194,272 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Heritage of pride works toward a future without discrimination where all people have equal rights under the law. We do this by producing lgbtqia + pride events that inspire, educate, commemorate and continued on schedule o
What it reported doing in 2024
Heritage of pride works toward a future without discrimination where all people have equal rights under the law. To achieve this goal, the organization produces lgbtqia+ pride events that inspire, educate, commemorate and celebrate the diverse lgbtqia+ community. Thepride march began as an annual civil rights demonstration the year after the New York city stonewall riots of 1969. Over the years, the march has evolved to a celebration of life and the promotion of pride and sense of community through a week long series of events.other annual pride events include: pridefest, the annual lgbtqia+ street fair; annual dance events, where people of different backgrounds and cultures come together to celebrate diversity; and the pride rally, featuring well known performers and motivatingspeakers from the lgbtqia+ community which marks the beginning of the pride week events.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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.
- 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 50.2%; rating input score 50
- Program expense ratio: 71.1%; rating input score 71
- Fundraising efficiency: $13.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 86.4%; rating input score 86; 24th 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: 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: NotApplicable
- 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: 29.5%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.7%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 50.2% of revenue deployed · 71.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $194K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $910K reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 11 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.