Hester Street Collaborative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200774906
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2124316780
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Urban, Community Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,151,792
Expenses
$3,165,255
Assets
$875,912
Liabilities
$880,192

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RASMIA KIRMANI-FRYE (Interim Executive Director)
  • Eva Alligood (Executive Director)
  • Timothy D Johnson (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • RASMIA KIRMANI-FRYE (Interim Executive Director): $146,931 total reported compensation
  • Eva Alligood (Executive Director): $144,574 total reported compensation
  • Vanessa Monique smith (Director of Strategy): $120,919 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 promote architecture, design and art in the community through the development of educational programs and improvements of the physical neighborhood.

What it reported doing in 2024

We design and implement participatory processes for community planning, design and equitable development; integrate data analysis and technical planning skills with inclusive, interactive community engagement resulting in concrete community benefits; design maps, activities, graphics, toolkits and other popular education tools to gather and disseminate information; demystify complex processes and inspire action plans; plan and manage community facility development projects for community-based organizations; provide technical assistance to plan projects, conduct spatial needs assessments, perform zoning and site analyses, identify sites, facilitate property acquisition, assemble financing and manage design and construction.

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 95% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.8%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 76.4%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.1%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.8% of revenue deployed · 76.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $147K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $105K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.