Friends of Rodeph Sholom School Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203099468
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2123628800
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,549,954
Expenses
$3,587,155
Assets
$14,391,195
Liabilities
$1,193,212

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MARC FRIED (CFO): $414,675 total reported compensation
  • LESLIE KUO (DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $225,966 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization was established to solicit and maintain funds for educational, charitable and religious purposes for the benefit of rodeph sholom school and to provide organizational structure and support for the school's programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Annual fund appeal and other specific purpose fund appeals to raise money to fund the operations of rodeph sholom school. (net proceeds of the fy 2025 annual fund will be granted to the school in fy 2026). Rodeph sholom school (rss) offers a rare and valuable education to a broad range of families seeking a community of shared beliefs. With our n-8 model, we nurture the natural love of learning in our youngest students, build the study habits and skills of children in our elementary division and help our middle school students find their individual voices as they prepare for success in high school and beyond. Our graduates matriculate to top tier high schools and universities with confidence, poise, and a strong sense of self rooted in jewish beliefs and values. It is our unique blend of academics and character development through the lens of reform judaism that makes rss a very special place within the world of New York city independent schools. And it is our strong sense of community fostered by our connection to congregation rodeph sholom that sets us apart.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 91% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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; 63rd 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: -1%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.01; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90% of revenue deployed · 86.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $415K · 29 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 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: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.