New York Transgender Advocacy Group

Legal name: NYTAG INC New York Transgender Advocacy Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811370263
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2020
Location
New York, NY, United States
Phone
1 848-272-1039
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,059,483
Expenses
$878,728
Assets
$700,548
Liabilities
$126,344

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • William Colon (Co Executive Director of Finance and Administration)
  • Kiara St James (Co Executive Director of Programs)
  • Kenyon Farrow (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • William Colon (Co Executive Director of Finance and Administration): $165,842 total reported compensation
  • Kiara St James (Co Executive Director of Programs): $78,062 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The New York Transgender Advocacy Group is a Transgender-led organization. Our mission is to advocate for more inclusive gender-based policies that benefit Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming/Non-Binary (TGNCNB) individuals through building community leaders, educating practitioners, and influencing policy makers.

What it reported doing in 2025

Nytag advocates for more inclusive gender-based policies that benefit transgender and gender non-conforming/non-binary (tgncnb) individuals through buidling community leaders, educating practitioners, and influencing policy makers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.5%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 83.8%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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; 64th 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.8%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.5% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.2% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 69.5% of revenue deployed · 83.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $736K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $166K · 13 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.