New Story Leadership Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271076407
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Chevy Chase, MD, USA
Phone
2025579462
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Promotion of International Understanding

Reported finances

Revenue
$280,032
Expenses
$230,923
Assets
$119,983
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Caroline Mays (Executive Director)
  • Nancy Adams (President)
  • Joy Markowitz (Vice-President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Caroline Mays (Executive Director): $97,167 total reported compensation
  • Alex Gorman-Chamness (Deputy Director): $66,250 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Bring outstanding Israeli and Palestinian young adults to Washington DC area to live and work together and develop leadership skills to be able to work towards a shared future together.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025 New Story Leadership NSL continued to adapt its programming in response to ongoing regional instability maintaining its focus on supporting alumni leadership advancing policy-relevant dialogue and strengthening organizational infrastructure for long-term impact. Building on the alumni-led initiative launched in 2024 NSL continued to support a core group of Israeli and Palestinian alumni working collaboratively on a shared framework for post-conflict recovery and peacebuilding. This initiative formerly referred to as the Phoenix Framework and further developed in 2025 outlines practical experience-informed approaches to key challenges including governance reconstruction trauma-informed healing and preparing societies for a sustainable peace. Throughout 2025 NSL facilitated opportunities for alumni to engage policymakers practitioners and civil society leaders in the United States and internationally. Alumni participated in briefings and meetings with congressional offices policy institutions and international stakeholders contributing perspectives grounded in lived experience and cross-conflict collaboration. These engagements aimed to inform policy conversations and elevate locally driven approaches to peacebuilding. In addition to external engagement NSL prioritized internal organizational development. The organization undertook efforts to strengthen its operational systems including building more robust donor and stakeholder tracking processes and refining program strategy for future implementation of its flagship Washington Leadership Program. NSL also explored strategic partnerships and program models to support future cohorts when conditions allow. NSL further advanced targeted program development in 2025 including planning for a womens leadership delegation to Ireland and Northern Ireland. This initiative is designed to draw lessons from the Northern Ireland peace process with a particular focus on the role of women in conflict resolution and post-conflict reconstruction and to integrate these insights into NSLs broader leadership and peacebuilding framework. While challenges related to travel security and regional conditions continued to impact program delivery NSL remained committed to its mission of developing a new generation of Israeli and Palestinian leaders equipped with the skills relationships and vision necessary to advance a more peaceful and shared future.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 91% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.2%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 62.8%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 61st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.5%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 70.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.2% of revenue deployed · 62.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $145K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $97K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.