Netivyah
Legal name: Netivyah USA Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 680553383
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Jun 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Jerusalem, TN, Israel
- Phone
- 972-2-6231019
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Interfaith Coalitions
- Affiliation
- Interfaith
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $633,787
- Expenses
- $746,942
- Assets
- $715,913
- Liabilities
- $-34,749
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Joseph B Shulam (President)
- Hava McClintock (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Baruch J Shulam (Treasurer): $135,999 total reported compensation
- Joseph B Shulam (President): $102,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Netivyah is an Israeli non-profit organization that teaches God’s Word and helps those in need. Hamotzi is a humanitarian project dedicated to providing food packages to families and individuals in need across Jerusalem. With poverty affecting countless lives, especially among large families who are under the poverty line, as well as the elderly and Holocaust survivors, our mission is to offer sustenance, dignity, and hope through nutritious meals. Every food package is carefully prepared to meet the nutritional needs of the recipients, offering not just food, but care and love. Feeding the needy Your Support is Critical.
What it reported doing in 2025
Created the antisemitism initiative and the Blue Hear campaign to combat antisemitism.Published two books: TFZ Retrospective Vol 2 and Parasha Bible Study Guide.Supported Netivyah TSDkay and Kehila with the Homotzi Food Distribution program.Traveled and preached in Finland and Brazil.Began YouTube channel video series Shalom Yall, Faith 925, and the Blended Kitchen in partnership with Barry and Beth Shulam.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 94% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and revenue has grown recently. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 55
- Accountability: 42
- Sustainability: 16
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.6%; rating input score 95
- Program expense ratio: 80%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th 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: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 57.1%; rating input score 57; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -17.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 31.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 94.6% of revenue deployed · 80% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $598K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $136K · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 57/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.