September 11Th Widows and Victims Families Assoc Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061635444
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2124223520
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$90,538
Expenses
$125,354
Assets
$140,706
Liabilities
$8,347,663

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LEE LELPI (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOAN MASTROPAOLO (BOARD MEMEBER)
  • PETER BITWINSKI (BOARD MEMBER)
  • LEE LELPI (PRESIDENT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The association supports victims of terrorism and their families through education, communication and peer support. Tribute educational programs connects and educates visitors with personal experiences of the 9/11 community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Tribute educational programs-9/11 tribute volunteers are trained to serve as educational guides to share their personal experiences. Tribute guides are family members who lost loved ones, survivors, first responders, recovery workers and residents of lower manhattan. Tribute guides provide educational experiences to visitors from around the world and school groups at the 9/11 memorial. Programming includes peer support and sharing the inspiring personal history of 9/11. Classroom educational web resources for teaching 9/11 are available at 911tributemuseum.org. Educational resources are based on exhibitions of the 9/11 tribute museum and 9/11 community personal stories of resilence. The tribute educational toolkit offers interactive video stories of people who were deeply affected by the attacks and reveal how they responed with humanitarian initiatives that strengthened their local and global communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 80% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.5%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -38.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 59.33; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -21.4% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -29.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -29.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $122K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.