New York Council for the Humanities

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510152266
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2122331131
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Humanities Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,942,913
Expenses
$2,302,630
Assets
$2,508,274
Liabilities
$884,332

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SARA OGGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ALYSON CASEY (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SARA OGGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $257,660 total reported compensation
  • ALYSON CASEY (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $198,263 total reported compensation
  • JOSEPH MURPHY (DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS): $129,453 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Humanities New York strengthens civil society through conversations that bring people together to remember the past, imagine new possibilities, and build a shared future.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community conversations: community conversations brings small, facilitated dialogues to trusted partner sites across New York state, including libraries, museums, historical societies, and community centers. Each session centers on a short text, image, or artifact that invites participants to reflect on meaning, change, justice, and belonging. In fy25, humanities New York redesigned and restarted the program through libraries and strategic partnerships across New York state.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 61% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 70.2%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -18.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.7%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.8% of revenue deployed · 70.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $258K · 22 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 24 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 19 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.