Oseh Chessed Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813288073
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Valley Village, CA, USA
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$652,752
Expenses
$363,957
Assets
$1,085,867
Liabilities
$8,527

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

People named in this filing

  • INBAL AZOULAY (Treasurer)

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

Feed and help needy families

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.7%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 74.3%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th 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: 44.2%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.98; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 34.8% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.7% of revenue deployed · 74.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $270K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.