Cedar Village Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272598846
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Cincinnati, OH, USA
Phone
5137663359
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$546,420
Expenses
$576,056
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Larry Neuman (Secretary)
  • Alan Eichner (Treasurer)
  • Andrew Shott (Board Member)

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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Cedar Village Foundation exists to provide a reliable source of funding to support Jewish Home of Cincinnati, Inc. Jewish Home of Cincinnati, Inc. exists to support Greater Cincinnati Jewish Seniors by investing in innovative services and programs that will allow them to feel they have connected, fulfilled lives. In 2022, the trustees determined that it was in the best interest of the Foundation to merge with and into Jewish Home of Cincinnati, Inc. in order to efficiently fulfill it mission of serving the health, wellness and connectedness of Jewish seniors throughout Cincinnati.

What it reported doing in 2022

Cedar Village Foundation is a supporting organization of Jewish Home of Cincinnati, Inc. The Foundation helps fund kosher meals, Jewish life and pastoral care for residents at Majestic Care at Cedar Village in Mason, Ohio. In 2022, the trustees of Cedar Village Foundation determined that it was in the best interest of the Foundation to merge with and into Jewish Home of Cincinnati, Inc. in order to efficiently fulfill its mission of serving the health, wellness and connectedness of Jewish seniors throughout Cincinnati. The merger was effective December 31, 2022.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.9%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.4%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.9% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $490K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $357K reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.