Rock & Wrap It Up Inc C/o Syd Mandelbaum

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113258486
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cedarhurst, NY, USA
Phone
5162950670
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Women's Service Clubs

Reported finances

Revenue
$220,239
Expenses
$169,260
Assets
$74,747
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SYD MANDELBAUM (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMY REILY (RECOVERY MAN): $36,500 total reported compensation
  • SYD MANDELBAUM (CEO): $24,000 total reported compensation
  • DIANE MANDELBAUM (COO): $20,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Rock and wrap it up is a global think tank working to reduce food insecurity and poverty. Using green house tactics, we recover food and assets to be given to agencies fighting poverty, increasing their operating budgets. This allows the agencies to hire more services such as tutors, social workers, job placement counselors and mental health counselors to attack the root cause of poverty. Rock and wrap it up recovers food from sports, schools, music, film, television, hospitals and hotels. Rock and wrap it up helped to write the federal food donation act of 2008 which encourages all federal buildings to feed the hungry and keep food out of landfills.

What it reported doing in 2024

It's a wrap rwu is currently recovering prepared but not served food from 56 film and tv production sets. These productions include tv series, feature films, and talk-shows with locations nationwide. Hotel/conference wrap rwu is currently working with over twenty hotels piloting the recovery of food and room assets. These assets include toilet paper rolls, tissue boxes, shampoo, conditioner and unopened soap from room vanities to keep them out of landfills. Hospital wrap rwu arranges the recovery of food from five hospitals that was prepared but has not been served as well as non-perishable foods for anti-poverty agencies. Feed the veterans rwu has developed the feed the veterans program where veterans, their caregivers and national agencies can access their national food pantry/soup kitchen database, hungerpedia. Hannah's project rwu has launched a program for at-risk teens and women to help maintain their dignity by providing feminine hygiene products to shelters, soup kitchens and pantries. Rock and wrap it up - advocacy: rwu wrote and helped pass the federal food donation act 2008. This act encourages federal buildings to donate food from the buildings to poverty fighting agencies instead of allowing it to be thrown out.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% 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. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 59
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.2%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 32.8%; rating input score 33
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 11
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.1%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 47.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.3% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.2% of revenue deployed · 32.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $56K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $36K · 26 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.