National Economic and Social Rights Initiative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
731714118
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2122531710
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Human Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,150,260
Expenses
$3,176,645
Assets
$3,311,242
Liabilities
$280,259

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kesi Foster (Co-Executive Director)
  • Elizabeth Sullivan-Yuknis (Co-Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Christina Jaus (Chief Financial Officer): $121,934 total reported compensation
  • Kesi Foster (Co-Executive Director): $121,572 total reported compensation
  • Elizabeth Sullivan-Yuknis (Co-Executive Director): $113,297 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

NESRI works in partnership with U.S. community-based organizations to increase their capacity to build a human rights movement. NESRI focuses on economic and social rights, including education, health, housing and work with dignity.

What it reported doing in 2024

Partners for Dignity & Rights (P4DR, legal name National Economic and Social Rights Initiative) supports community partners in their campaigns for economic and social rights, including education and work with dignity, and advances a larger vision of equity, corporate accountability and democracy for all. Through our New Social Contract and co-governance work, we documented case studies of collaborative projects between communities and local government, launching an on-line Co-governance Landscape Map, with over 40 examples from around the country. We released two reports: Community Schools & Co-governance: Lessons from Los Angeles and San Diego, and Assemblies as a Tool for Just Democracy. We also continued our partnerships in Washington state with the Just Futures coalition around state-commissioned community assemblies, and in New York City to help design a co-governance model for local City Council District 10. (Continued Sch O)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 74.4%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -176.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.04; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.5%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 74.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $122K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.