Westchester Library System

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
131882114
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Elmsford, NY, USA
Phone
9146743600
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,272,252
Expenses
$7,660,441
Assets
$6,126,687
Liabilities
$4,363,970

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NISHAT HYDARI (PRESIDENT)
  • ANTHONY AMIANO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • TERRY KIRCHNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TERRY KIRCHNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $305,133 total reported compensation
  • ROBERT CALUORI (CFO): $236,038 total reported compensation
  • WILSON ARANA (IT DIRECTOR): $199,654 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The westchester library system (wls) collaborates with the 38 public libraries in westchester county to provide access to resources and services and to enhance and support library service for more than 1,000,000 residents. Wls is one of New York state's 23 public library systems.

What it reported doing in 2025

Public service - wls provides an array of services to its member libraries and the public. The public programs offered are open to all, with a focus to serve underserved and marginalized populations including teens, seniors, justice impacted individuals and the literacy challenged. Through direct services to and advocacy on behalf of these groups wls programs connect individuals with access to information and resources for health and wellness, career development, literacy, education, and access to essential resources. In serving its member libraries wls builds partnerships between the library community and local non-profit organizations to increase awareness of library programs and services, promote workforce development and engage and empower the public they serve.

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

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: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 84%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $73.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.3%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.71; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.6%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.2% of revenue deployed · 84% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $6.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $305K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.2M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.