Bais Yaakov School For Girls

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953127279
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3239383231
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12
Affiliation
Judaism

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,558,500
Expenses
$3,644,615
Assets
$20,311,465
Liabilities
$12,858

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Rabbi Joel Bursztyn (Director): $202,661 total reported compensation
  • Diana S Wolmark (Principal): $198,273 total reported compensation
  • Naomi Bursztyn (Administrator): $178,782 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Organization is a Religious High School established that is consistent with the tenets, beliefs, and guidance of Rabbinic and Yeshiva Ultra - Orthodox Judaism for Jewish woman with a rigorous academic secular and general education.

What it reported doing in 2023

Bais Yaakov School for Girls provides high school aged young women in the greater Los Angeles community with an ultra-orthodox Jewish education along with a complete secular studies program. The organization provides a rigorous academic environment for ultra - orthodox Jewish women to study, excel, and prepare themselves for living a traditional Rabbinic Torah life in a secular society with vastly different levels of moral and ethical standards and values.

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 96% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.6%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 90.4%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th 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: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.5%; rating input score 96; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.57; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.6% of revenue deployed · 90.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $203K · 7 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.