Hudson Yards Hells Kitchen Business Improvement District

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471247857
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2124461682
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,426,536
Expenses
$4,517,216
Assets
$1,631,738
Liabilities
$573,485

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

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT J BENFATTO JR (PRESIDENT)
  • DANIEL SCORSE (VICE PRESIDENT OF OPERATIONS)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT J BENFATTO JR (PRESIDENT): $286,897 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL SCORSE (VICE PRESIDENT OF OPERATIONS): $158,184 total reported compensation
  • PATRICIA R MALTEZOS (DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT): $120,938 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 assist in the overall economic improvement of the hudson yards district by improving district-wide services and improvements and providing maintenance and supplemental public safety in bella abzug park.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hudson park - providing maintenance and supplemental public safety in hudson park according to the terms of a management agreement with the city's department of parks & recreation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 84.1%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • 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: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -2%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.5%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.8% of revenue deployed · 84.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 31 of 31 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $287K · 34 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.