Stella and Charles Guttman Community College Auxiliary Enterprises Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463648632
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2013
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6463138029
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Higher Education Institutions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$28,016
Expenses
$15,002
Assets
$79,445
Liabilities
$3,100

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DANIEL AMBROSE (MEMBER)
  • DARA PIR (MEMBER)
  • LUIS ZAMBRANO (MEMBER)

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

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

Overview

Mission

The stella and charles guttman community college auxiliary enterprise corporation (the auxiliary) is a nonprofit entity organized to support certain student activities and provide facilities and auxiliary services for the benefit of the campus community of the stella and charles guttman community college (the college) of the city university of New York (cuny of the university).

What it reported doing in 2024

Facilities and auxiliary services for the benefit of the campus community of the stella and charles guttman community college.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 79% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.2%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 46.5%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.3; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.9% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.