Rochester Public Library

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223160973
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
Phone
5854288056
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Libraries

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$27,969,883
Expenses
$26,343,826
Assets
$18,033,869
Liabilities
$9,884,048

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DONNA P BENJAMIN (PRESIDENT)
  • ELLEN BRENNER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • EMILY CLASPER (LIBRARY DIRECTOR (AS OF 1/13/25)): $178,476 total reported compensation
  • PATRICIA UTTARO (LIBRARY DIRECTOR (THROUGH 2/14/25)): $170,014 total reported compensation
  • ANA PEREZ AGOSTO (PERSONNEL DIRECTOR): $165,092 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 engage the community in life-long learning for all through equal access to information, technology, gathering spaces and expert staff.

What it reported doing in 2024

The rochester public library assists the city of rochester and monroe county in meeting the needs of the community by operating the central and branch libraries and providing centralized library services (automation, catalog, interlibrary loan, and delivery) to other public libraries in monroe county. There are approximately 370,000 active library card holders in monroe county with over 6,750,000 items borrowed each year. The central and branch libraries have over 800,000 visitors each year, with over 1,060,000 items borrowed and 1,580,000 items delivered to member libraries annually.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 88% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.1%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 86.1%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 66th 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: 5.8%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.55; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.1% of revenue deployed · 86.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $22.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $178K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $15.4M reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.