Orlando Community Kollel
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 923843288
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Orlando, FL, USA
- Phone
- (407) 383-6192
- Rating
- 58
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $358,634
- Expenses
- $428,797
- Assets
- $78,116
- Liabilities
- $14,722
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- MARK ROSENWASSER (Chairman)
- YOMTOV LIPA GOLDBERGER (Trustee)
- SROYOHU LEVITANSKY (Trustee)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Kollel has a twofold mission: to strengthen its scholars through continued high-level learning, and to provide them with wide opportunities for Harbatzas Torah; at the same time, it seeks to enrich the Orlando Jewish community by serving as an anchor of Torah study that inspires and uplifts every Jew. The Kollel has a twofold mission: to strengthen its scholars through continued high-level learning, and to provide them with wide opportunities for Harbatzas Torah. At the same time, it seeks to enrich the Orlando Jewish community by serving as an anchor of Torah study that inspires and uplifts every Jew. 909aa9a4-e080-46b4-af4f-35ba167ac92c 2.JPG. Rabbi Naftali Kassorla serves as Menahel of the Orlando Community Kollel, bringing years of experience as an educator, leader, and community builder. He learned in the Mir Yeshiva and in Brisk under Rav Meir Soloveitchik zt”l and advanced...
What it reported doing in 2024
The orginazation supports religious studies in the city of orlando
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.
The verdict
MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 58
- Accountability: 0
- Sustainability: 20
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 89.6%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -19.6%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 59.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -56.3% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $384K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.