Historic Tappen Park Community Partnership Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455576128
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Staten Island, NY, USA
Phone
3476951920
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Botanical Gardens, Arboreta and Botanical Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$507,494
Expenses
$553,190
Assets
$63,344
Liabilities
$71,812

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kamillah M Hanks (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kamillah M Hanks (President & CEO): $106,173 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote Tappen Park as a viable venue for positive community arts, cultural and educational programs and events. The organization seeks to encourage public and private investment for the continious structural and overall beautification of Tappen Park, and is committed to make Tappen Park a place-making public space that helps spur positive economic development of the surrounding neighborhood to promote a healthier, more social and economically viable community.

What it reported doing in 2020

Despite challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic Historic Tappen Park continued its focus on its Building Urban Innovative Youth through Leadership & Development Program (B.U.I.L.D) youth program. B.U.I.L.D. was the first of its kind in Staten Island, and provides a pathway for unemployed, low-income youth (between the ages of 18 -24) an opportunity to reclaim their education, gain the skills they need for employment, and become leaders in rebuilding and shaping their communities. During 2020 this program continued to be was mainly funded by a grant from the US Department of Labor. The program integrates education, job training, leadership, travel and community service to help young adults realize their potential, while also benefiting the community. The comprehensive program model includes five broad areas: education, vocational training, counseling and case management, leadership and community service, and career/graduate services. The program is a pre-apprentice program that gives its students the ability to earn industry-recognized credentials for in-demand occupations and undergo training to build affordable housing in their communities. B.U.I.L.D. brings in qualified and top industry specialists and trainers that are focused on incorporating real world experiences to help transform young lives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 75% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.4%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.13; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.2%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.1% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.6% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.4% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $484K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $106K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Board meeting minutes documented not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.