National Council for the Developmentally Challenged Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133992365
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Spring Valley, NY, USA
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Reported finances

Revenue
$136,783
Expenses
$130,458
Assets
$32,329
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sinai Halberstam (President)

People named in this filing

  • Sinai Halberstam (President)
  • Yachiel Steinmetz (VP/Secretary)
  • Avraham Tzvi Pinkowitz (Treasurer)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Community enrichment center for kids that are developmentally challenged

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.6%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 22.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89% of revenue deployed · 93.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2013
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.