Shelters for Israel

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
956118813
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Beverly Hills, CA, USA
Phone
3107029169
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$214,839
Expenses
$325,682
Assets
$273,041
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • David Jackson (CO President)

People named in this filing

  • Myra Gabbay (COPresident)
  • Edward Markley (Director)
  • Yael Swerdlow (Director)

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

Founded in 1948, Shelters for Israels mission is to provide funding for vital projects, programs, and facilities in Israel to support the neediest populations, with a focus on improving the lives of children and the elderly, including Holocaust survivors.Shelters for Israel has always been and remains an all-volunteer organization with no paid staff or office space.Shelters for Israel has funded over 70 capital projects, starting with its original mission of providing housing for Holocaust survivors, and has continued to fund housing for the elderly as well as student dormitories, childcare facilities, pre-kindergartens, day care centers for the elderly, medical facilities and equipment, and facilities for children and adults with special needs, and so much more.Shelters for Israel also provides funding for vital programs addressing the needs of at-risk youth for their physical, educational, and emotional well-being. This includes through support of programs providing at-risk youth wit

What it reported doing in 2024

Over the past 75 years we have provided funding for the construction of more than 70 capital projects, including for housing, childcare and kindergartens, and day care centers for the elderly, medical facilities and dormitories, as well as educational facilities for autistic and learning disabled children in various communities in Israel. We also grant funds to provide impoverished holocaust survivors with basic needs and provide support for at-risk and disadvantaged youth, among other programs meant to provide for the basic needs and emotional support of young people.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.5%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • 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: 50%; rating input score 50; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -51.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $308K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 17 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.