Prizmah

Legal name: Jewish Community Day School Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911894659
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2015
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2126651320
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,012,012
Expenses
$2,496,787
Assets
$882,903
Liabilities
$192,880

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR MARC KRAMER (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • IDANA GOLDBERG (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR MARC KRAMER (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $467,590 total reported compensation
  • IDANA GOLDBERG (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $284,900 total reported compensation
  • DR ELLIOTT I RABIN (DIR PROJECT & CONTENT DEVELP): $105,690 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Prizmah: Center for Jewish Day Schools

What it reported doing in 2015

The jewish community day school network ("ravsak") has a program - head of school professional excellence project ("hos pep"). This program is to strengthen new day school directors while preserving valuable knowledge and experience from recognized leaders in the field. This program's goals are to help the head of school master the culture and behaviors of excellent leadership specific to a jewish day school setting; to improve the lay leader/professional leader divide that troubles many schools by creating a spirit of collaboration and common goals; to help the head of school lead in a jewish way by assisting him/her to craft a model of jewish leadership most germane to the school community; and to diminish the sense of isolation that can be part of the head of school experience.

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 100% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.2%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 50.1%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 11th 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: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -24.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 62.2% of revenue deployed · 50.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $468K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2009 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.