Educators Institute for Human Rights In
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 273941018
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2014
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2027462332
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Promotion of International Understanding
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $192,551
- Expenses
- $196,434
- Assets
- $31,855
- Liabilities
- $20,369
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KELLEY SZANY (BOARD VICE PRESIDENT)
- JOHN HEFFERNAN (BOARD PRESIDENT)
- KATE ENGLISH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- KATE ENGLISH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $133,744 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Eihr cultivates partnerships among educators globally to create materials and deliver training based on best practices in holocaust and human rights education. Together we deliver content and strategies for teaching conflict history and prevention, and sustainable peace.
What it reported doing in 2025
1. Expanding use of our curriculum in more schools in argentina.2. Supporting teachers in ukraine through networking, webinars, and developing materials for u.s. Teachers on the history of the holodomor.3. Facilitating exchange of materials on america's history of inequality and conflict with u.s. Based social justice program partners.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 79
- Sustainability: 18
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
- Program expense ratio: 74.8%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $25.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th 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%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.16; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.64; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 68.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 74.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $147K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $134K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.