Menachem Education Foundation

Legal name: Menachem Education Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262117750
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Graduate, Professional Schools (Separate Entities)
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,504,732
Expenses
$1,949,436
Assets
$585,567
Liabilities
$446,643

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SENDER GORDON (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • ZALMAN SHNEUR (Executive Dir.): $141,020 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To raise the bar for Chabad Chinuch (Jewish education) by supporting Chabad day schools worldwide with resources, training, and programs that inspire students and educators.

What it reported doing in 2024

Menachem Education Foundation Vision, Mission, and 5784-2024 Accomplishments Vision At MEF, we envision a world where every student in Chabad schools thrives to their fullest potential-graduating with the values, confidence, and skills needed to live as a Chassid in today's world. Mission The Menachem Education Foundation (MEF) champions student success by working directly with schools, focusing uncompromisingly on enhancing student outcomes. MEF develops systems and infrastructure that reach every child in the classroom? providing high-quality curricula, comprehensive teacher training, and robust support for school leaders. _ 5784-2024 Accomplishments Overview Training & Leadership Development - 1,344 principals and teachers trained through MEF? s professional development programs. - 49 teachers and principals received individualized and group coaching through Chabad Chinuch Consulting. - 11 customized workshops conducted directly in schools across the country. - Community & Collaboration - 878 educators attended the annual Kinus Mechanchim and Kinus Mechanchos Chabad, representing over 210 schools. - 2,759 educators and 356 parents participated in MEF programs throughout the year. - Monthly Farbrengens and professional webinars fostered networking and continued inspiration among educators. - Curricular Resources - 15,566 students learned Chumash based on the Zekelman Standards for Chumash, supported by 31 training sessions and webinars for teachers. - Project TOMIM launched in 14 schools, engaging 250 students in learning emotional and spiritual development through Chassidus. - The Chabad Curriculum Database expanded to 105 curricula and is used globally by educators. - Our Heritage Program - 134 New students transferred from public school to Jewish day schools through Our Heritage, - Participating schools across 18 locations reported an 81% retention rate of students. - Leadership Retreats - 52 school leaders joined the Men's Chabad School Leadership Retreat (Coral Springs, FL). - 25 school leaders participated in the Women's Chabad School Leadership Retreat (Los Angeles, CA).

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 71
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.8%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 45.9%; rating input score 46; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 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: 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: -29.6%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.76; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.8% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 10 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $141K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 15 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: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.