Mikvah Mei Chaya Mushka

Legal name: Mei Chaya Mushka Mikvah Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264550636
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Brooklyn, NY, United States
Phone
718-221-0221
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Judaism
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$359,027
Expenses
$109,315
Assets
$2,854,402
Liabilities
$338,481

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Moshe Pinson (Director)
  • Avrohom Bistritsky (Director)
  • Zalman Skoblo (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Donors-dine-at-construction-site מקווה "מי חיה מושקא" בשלבי סיום Progress at Crown Heights Women's Mikvah. Donor Saves Mikvah's Day Steel Arrives for Mikvah New Mikvah Construction Begins. Mikvah Thanks Fundraiser Donors Stunning New Mikvah Taking Shape Mikvah Mei Chaya Mushka.

What it reported doing in 2015

Cost of construction of religious Mikvah which will begin operation in 2016. In addition to program expenses shown on part IX of this form, capital expenditures, towards construction equaled 184,721..

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 29
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 11%; rating input score 11
  • Program expense ratio: 36.2%; rating input score 36
  • Fundraising efficiency: $512.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 69.6%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.11; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 63% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 11% of revenue deployed · 36.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $40K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.