America-israel Friendship League Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237252135
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
5163251990
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Exchange, N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$648,348
Expenses
$473,287
Assets
$193,954
Liabilities
$9,192

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JONATHAN BARSADE (PRESIDENT)
  • JUNE DEMPSEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MORTIMER ZUCKERMAN (HONORARY PRESIDENT)
  • RUBY SHAMIR (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ALLEN SESSOMS (DIRECTOR)
  • ARTHUR SCHNEIER (DIRECTOR)
  • CAROL KARSCH (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To provide educational and cultural exchange programs as well as promoting friendship and understanding between united states and israel.

What it reported doing in 2024

Leadership delegations - 2022-2024 saw the relaunching of delegation activity. Aifl continues to see high-impact delegation activity as a cornerstone of its continued activity base. The first delegation was that of hispanic community leaders, individuals who are active and influential in the hispanic community and are well positioned to activate social support. They are leaders from various professional arenas such as academia, business, industry, science and technology. The purpose of the delegation's visit was to bring together hispanic community leaders as aifl stakeholders. Their itinerary was designed to help them recognize and gain a better understanding of the importance of u.s. - israel relations and their role in strengthening the ties that bind these two democracies within their respective

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

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 26
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 22.6%; rating input score 23
  • Program expense ratio: 31%; rating input score 31
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 22.6% of revenue deployed · 31% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 36 of 36 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $147K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 26 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $150K reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.