Selfhelp Realty Group Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831013439
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2129717606
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,295,005
Expenses
$6,498,670
Assets
$7,800,640
Liabilities
$6,042,464

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA TRUB (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SRG)
  • STUART C KAPLAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • PAULA YAMAKAITIS (CFO/SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STUART C KAPLAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $1,089,839 total reported compensation
  • PAULA YAMAKAITIS (CFO/SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT): $403,933 total reported compensation
  • LISA TRUB (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SRG): $232,057 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Selfhelp realty group, inc. Was formed to continue and expand the affordable housing activities conducted by selfhelp community services, inc. The organization acts as a developer and sponsor of affordable housing.

What it reported doing in 2024

Selfhelp realty group, inc. Is committed to developing new affordable housing to accommodate the growing number of older new yorkers who need affordable housing and would benefit from remaining independent in their own homes.

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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.4%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 76%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -3.2%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.77; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.1%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 34.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 33.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.4% of revenue deployed · 76% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 21 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $369K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 38 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.