Union Square Partnership District Management Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133202710
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2124601200
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,302,931
Expenses
$4,147,606
Assets
$1,754,935
Liabilities
$531,482

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEN HENSLEY (PRESIDENT)
  • JULIE STEIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JULIE STEIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $251,029 total reported compensation
  • EDWARD L JANOFF (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $215,954 total reported compensation
  • TALI CANTOR (DIRECTOR OF PLANNING): $160,130 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 organization provides supplemental sanitation, public safety, streetscape improvement, visitor information and commercial support services to property owners, businesses and residents of an area established as a business improvement district.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operations - maintaining clean streets and curbs, removing garbage and graffiti, and coordinating public safety through connecting neighborhood partners to the relevant city and state agency contacts, including New York city police department, sanitation, homeless services, transportation, and consumer affairs among others.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 86%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.6%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.7%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.6% of revenue deployed · 86% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $251K · 22 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $2M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.