Gottesman Rtw Academy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
221833220
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Randolph, NJ, USA
Phone
9735845530
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,440,885
Expenses
$7,838,585
Assets
$15,319,014
Liabilities
$1,044,046

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Liron Kormas Harpaz (President)
  • Alyssa Engleberg Nunn (President)
  • Rachel Castellanos (Vice President)
  • Victoria Morrison (2nd Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR MOSHE VAKNIN (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $212,090 total reported compensation
  • DR CHERYL BAHAR (DEAN OF GENERAL STUDIES): $165,004 total reported compensation
  • NAOMI BACHARACH (DIRECTOR INSTITUTIONAL ADVANCE): $126,218 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Gottesman rtw academy maintains high standards of academic excellence while nurturing each student's social and emotional needs and growth. Grtwa inspires intellectual curiosity, critical thinking, and personal integrity to enable our students to emerge as lifelong learners, compassionate individuals, and successful members of society who are rooted in their heritage. As a community day school, grtwa celebrates the richness of jewish life and has a strong connection to israel. Grtwa welcomes families from a wide range of jewish backgrounds, reflecting the diversity of the american jewish community today.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operation of a jewish day school for approximately 173 students living in the area of morris county, nj.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.2%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.95; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.2% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $212K · 21 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $100K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.