The Joint Ownership Entity New York City Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475044823
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6467684100
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,161
Expenses
$391,410
Assets
$9,906,748
Liabilities
$1,429,640

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STANLEY CELIUS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • STANLEY CELIUS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $186,295 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The primary purposes of joe nyc are to strengthen its members' ability to develop, maintain, and manage affordable housing and serve as a vehicle to maintain long-term affordability of existing and future affordable housing units in support of their missions as community-based organizations that align their housing development and management work with the needs and resources of the communities served and focus on resident services and support.

What it reported doing in 2024

Real estate asset management: monitor income and expenses of real estate portfolio and identify expense reduction measures.real estate portfolio development: undertake process of transferring ownership interest of properties owned by community development corporations in the joint ownership entity; acquire properties through real estate acquisitions.

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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -3,118.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 25.31; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 47.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.5% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $391K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 36 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.