Keren Hachesed Student Aid Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222182267
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Lakewood, NJ, USA
Phone
7323642975
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Judaism
Affiliation
Judaism

Reported finances

Revenue
$499,699
Expenses
$531,242
Assets
$3,791,561
Liabilities
$72,600

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • RABBI DOV KREISWIRTH (Trustee): $31,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Student Aid programs

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 50
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.9%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 1.2%; rating input score 1; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.3%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.14; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.1% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $515K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $31K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 19 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 1/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.