Horizons New York City

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
851000631
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Brooklyn, NY, US
Phone
(646) 518-7762
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$827,234
Expenses
$610,798
Assets
$1,120,859
Liabilities
$130,676

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MACY STOCKTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MACY STOCKTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $164,174 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To bring high-quality, student-centered Horizons programs to more students, empowering them to discover the joys of learning and fulfill their potential in school and life.

What it reported doing in 2025

Guided by a professional faculty in a nurturing environment, our program model emphasizes academics, the arts, cultural awareness, athletics, and social-emotional growth. With specific goals to improve literacy and math, we prioritize students' annual return - ensuring consistent intervention in early development and onwards. HNYC and its program sites are committed to the development of the whole child through experiences that enhance self-esteem, build problem-solving and critical-thinking skills, encourage a lifelong interest in learning, expand horizons, and foster awareness of social responsibility.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.4%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 64%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.2%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.84; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 48.4% of revenue deployed · 64% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $391K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $164K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.