Holy Trinity Neighborhood Center, Inc.
Legal name: Holy Trinity Neighborhood Center In
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 753107120
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- New York, NY, United States
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Soup Kitchens
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $73,017
- Expenses
- $31,960
- Assets
- $109,229
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DAVID LISTON (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- JOHN BEDDINGFIELD (CHAIR)
- DAVID LISTON (PRESIDENT)
- NICK VIEST (VP)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
HTNC supports neighbors in need on the Upper East Side and East Harlem through its weekly Saturday Supper, offering a free, site-prepared meal to around 100–125 people every week; the organization also operates as an integral part of the Church of the Holy Trinity. HTNC, a non-sectarian 501(c)3 organization, continues a proud tradition begun with the founding of St. Christopher's House in 1897, erected to serve the local population of immigrants and longtime Yorkville residents. About HTNC provides an opportunity for those interested in supporting our work, regardless of whether they share our faith, to join in helping us help others. However, HTNC and its programs were always envisioned as an integral part of the Church of the Holy Trinity and an arm of its mission, and its bylaws require that three members of the HTNC board must be members of the church’s vestry. Since the...
What it reported doing in 2024
Weekly neighborhood supper
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.
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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 58
- Transparency & Controls: 93
- Accountability: 64
- Sustainability: 70
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 43.8%; rating input score 44
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 56.2%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.42; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 158.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 40% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 43.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $32K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 44/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.