A Chassidisher Derher

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823816496
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
+1 (718) 305-6859
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religious Printing, Publishing
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,241,035
Expenses
$1,409,054
Assets
$161,390
Liabilities
$457,879

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Yosef Kamman (Secretary): $144,417 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We’re on a mission to teach Yidden about Chassidus and the Chassidishe way of life. We’re on a mission to teach Yidden about Chassidus and the Chassidishe way of life About Us. But Derher is more than a magazine. Derher’s mission has always been to teach and inspire Yidden about Chassidus and the Chassidishe way of life, with special emphasis on the unique mission of our generation—Dor Hashvii, the Rebbe, and the Rebbe’s teachings. To achieve this goal, Derher runs many initiatives, forming a range of opportunities for people of all ages to connect to the Rebbe. These include: Derher for Kids Magazine, Derher Archive, Derher Audio, Derher for Kids Podcast, Derher for Kids Story Time, Derhers clubs for high schools and Yeshivas.

What it reported doing in 2025

A Chassidisher Derher publishes a monthly magazine as well as other periodic material that condones greater and stricter observance of Torah and Jewish law, as well as stricter adherence to the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe. Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, OBM

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 50
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.6%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 48.1%; rating input score 48
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.84; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.2%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 54.6% of revenue deployed · 48.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $677K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.