Operation Embrace Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043652179
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Potomac, MD, USA
Phone
3012750419
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Emergency Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$241,273
Expenses
$194,461
Assets
$429,644
Liabilities
$9,863

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AVIVA TESSLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • LARRY GREEN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • AVIVA TESSLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $48,335 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide direct financial assistance for medical, therapeutic, and rehabilitative needs to injured survivors of terror attacks in israel and emotional support through post traumatic stress disorder programs.

What it reported doing in 2025

During the year, operation embrace provided direct assistance to victims and their families. Direct gifts and services provided to families include: tuition assistance, medical equipment, after school activities for children, transportation to therapy sessions, psych evaluations, conventional and alternative therapies, and basic supplemental income. Various holiday events, summer activities, and other functions were coordinated on behalf of victims and their families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 40% for direct work, and 60% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 58
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.6%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 73.4%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 24.6%; rating input score 25; 42nd 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.21; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.6% of revenue deployed · 73.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $143K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $48K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 25/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.