Caskey Torah Academy
Legal name: Morris and Rose Caskey Torah Academy of Greater Philadelphia
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 231645684
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Wynnewood, PA, United States
- Phone
- (610) 642-7870
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Kindergarten, Preschool, Nursery School, Early Admissions
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $11,132,693
- Expenses
- $9,829,988
- Assets
- $28,847,582
- Liabilities
- $1,448,425
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DOVID DANIEL (PRESIDENT)
- GABE HERMAN (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
- GABE AMZALLAG (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- RABBI ISAAC ENTIN (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $202,957 total reported compensation
- SHARON JOSHOWITZ (BUSINESS MANAGER): $128,446 total reported compensation
- REBECCA SASSON (PRINCIPAL GEN STUDIES): $118,925 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Caskey Torah Academy of Greater Philadelphia Caskey Torah Academy of Greater Philadelphia is committed to prepare the foundation for its students to mature as Torah-observant Jews and role models who are contributing members in Jewish and general society. Providing stimulating education for Jewish students with different learning styles and academic capability in a loving environment that promotes Ahavat Torah, Ahavat Yisrael, Medinat Yisrael, and excellence in learning and in teaching. Caskey Torah Academy makes every reasonable effort to provide tuition assistance to those families in need of it.
What it reported doing in 2024
Operation of a school for preschool through grade 8.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 64% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 78.8%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 88.2%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $33.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.7%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.93; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 78.8% of revenue deployed · 88.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $203K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.