Swc Museum Corp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954786388
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3102826271
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
History Museums

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,755,470
Expenses
$6,219,907
Assets
$223,971,577
Liabilities
$46,586,766

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DIANA ZHU (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $120,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The center is building a museum in israel that will be a world center focusing on issues of human dignity and responsibility and seeks to promote unity and respect among jews and between people of all faiths.it will house two high-tech experiential museums, one for adults and one for children; an international state-of-the-art conference center; grand hall; an educational center; and a theatre of the performing arts.

What it reported doing in 2024

Swc museum corp. Raises funds to utilize in the construction of a center for human dignity and a museum of tolerance in jerusalem, israel. In accordance with gaap, in serving its mission, swc museum corp. Capitalizes costs associated with the construction of the center and museum. All expenses related to program services are currently being capitalized while the center and museum are under construction. Upon completion of the center and museum, all program service expenses will no longer be capitalized.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 90
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 24.1%; rating input score 24
  • Program expense ratio: 59.2%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $32.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 72.7%; rating input score 73; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 60.5%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 36.01; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 44% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 24.1% of revenue deployed · 59.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 14 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $788K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 24/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.