Trinity Community Connection Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943447082
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2122227045
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$950,687
Expenses
$883,360
Assets
$397,001
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Alyssa Kaplan (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Wendy Kaplan (Director, Trinity Place Shelter): $191,600 total reported compensation
  • Anne Fry (Treasurer): $53,300 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide social services (especially shelter, food, referrals and counseling) to low-income and under-served members of the community, especially unhoused LGBTQ+ youth and young adults.

What it reported doing in 2025

Trinity Place Shelter is a 10-bed transitional shelter which has been open for 17 years and provides transitional housing for LGBTQ+ youth and young adults (ages 18-24), a population that is gravely underserved and at-risk. TPS provides a year-round safe place for residents to sleep, prepare meals, store belongings; to receive social services (referrals for government assistance, emergency and long-term medical care, job/education/housing opportunities, individual and small-group mental-health counseling, and finance/savings counseling, to facilitate the permanent ending of homelessness. Funding is received from public donations, foundation and grants, and city/state grants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.2%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.1%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.7%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.2% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $750K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $192K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.