Abraham Joshua Heschel Day School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
952794822
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Northridge, CA, USA
Phone
8183685781
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,876,305
Expenses
$16,230,266
Assets
$24,645,927
Liabilities
$6,791,570

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MELANIE COHEN (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)
  • DORAN TAJKEF (DIRECTOR/PAST PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAWRENCE KLIGMAN (DIRECTOR/HEAD OF SCHOOL): $453,776 total reported compensation
  • SARAH SCHULTZ (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $251,960 total reported compensation
  • LARA MARTIN (ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DIRECTOR): $195,260 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Abraham joshua heschel day school cultivates students' natural sense of wonder into an exceptionally rich education that encourages critical thinking, creativity, and compassion. In partnership with our families, we inspire our students to become kind, empowered individuals committed to the values of the jewish people, the vitality of israel, and repairing our world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Heschel day school, with an enrollment of approximately 330 students in pre-kindergarten through eighth grade, serves families from all denominations within the community.heschel is dedicated to providing an integrated secular and judaic program which develops self-directed and resourceful learners. We consider the whole child and seek to engender a strong sense of self and a life-long commitment to learning and to judaism.recognizing that each child is unique, instruction is designed to accommodate the individual needs of learners.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 76% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 80.7%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.5%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67% of revenue deployed · 80.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $454K · 27 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.5M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.