Point Source Youth Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473748007
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
9173921018
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,550,310
Expenses
$3,617,011
Assets
$7,533,247
Liabilities
$71,858

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CYNTHIA LANGTIW (PRESIDENT)
  • ANA OLIVERIA (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAWRENCE COHEN (CO-FOUNDER AND EXEC. DIR.): $317,501 total reported compensation
  • LAUREN WILKIE (VP, STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS): $212,401 total reported compensation
  • ANJALA HUFF (VP, DIRECT CASH TRANSFERS): $211,054 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 prevent youth homelessness, including lgbtq youth, to aid homeless youth through tested methods of intervention, and to support organizations serving homeless youth, point source youth provides assistance with access to funding, evaluation of programs and technical expertise.

What it reported doing in 2025

We help advocate for, implement, and evaluate proven, scalable, and replicable youth homelessness interventions including - direct cash transfers with services for a housing outcome, direct cash transfers as prevention, host homes, and rapid re-housing - to increase housing options for youth and to end youth homelessness.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.2%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $36.62 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • 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; 75th 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: 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 52.1%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.08; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.2% of revenue deployed · 75.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $318K · 14 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $852K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.