Operation Exodus USA
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 202076659
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lancaster, NY, USA
- Phone
- 7166816300
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,199,719
- Expenses
- $1,088,187
- Assets
- $2,235,460
- Liabilities
- $62,258
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN PROSSER (PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN PROSSER (PRESIDENT/CEO): $69,135 total reported compensation
- PEGGY PERRY (FINANCIAL MANAGER): $61,798 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Oeusa's articles of incorporation describe its charitable mission to include providing humanitarian aid to jewish communities and christian churches. This mission includes facilitating emigration of jewish people to israel from the former soviet union and elsewhere and educating the public about the jewish religion, jewish history, culture and heritage
What it reported doing in 2024
In 2024, oeusa presented free educational events for the public throughout the us about the urgency of assisting jewish people to emigrate to israel. To accomplish this, oeusa's 10 staff and 83 total volunteers, 23 active volunteers, worked to educate the us public about jewish persons suffering persecution in the former soviet union (fsu) and elsewhere, including in the us. Oeusa also worked to educate both christians and the jewish community in the us about the jewish religion, jewish history, culture, and heritage. In 2024, oeusa's 781 prayer intercessors (prayer partners) provided vital spiritual support for oeusa. Further, oeusa provided updates on its educational activities to 265 churches and 7,189 individual supporters. In addition, a member of oeusa's board met with the board of ebenezer emergency fund international, in swansea, wales. These meetings enabled oeusa and ebenezer emergency fund international to discuss similar activities conducted by each organization to assist distressed jewish persons in the fsu. In order to support its activities, oeusa maintained offices in the us located in New York city and oeusa's headquarters in lancaster, New York. Oeusa is a member of the evangelical council for financial accountability (efca).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 57% for direct work, and 43% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 58
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 73.6%; rating input score 74
- Program expense ratio: 80%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $32.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th 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: 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: 89%; rating input score 89; 38th 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; 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: 9.3%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.05; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 23.4% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 73.6% of revenue deployed · 80% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $870K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $69K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.