Swiss Benevolent Society of New York

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
131624199
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2122460655
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alumni Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$904,024
Expenses
$1,159,787
Assets
$8,563,834
Liabilities
$338,222

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARKUS BRUDERER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JOHANNA REINHART (PRESIDENT)
  • RUEDI GREINER (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARKUS BRUDERER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $172,828 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 mission of the swiss benevolent society of New York (society) is to provide information and programs to its members, serve the needs of the swiss new yorkers and promote intercultural cooperation. The society provides financial and other relief to qualified persons, including, but not limited to natives of switzerland, or of swiss origin who are in the U.S.and in need of assistance. (note: our services are specifically not limited to our members).

What it reported doing in 2024

Social services: the swiss benevolent society handled 48 clients with 79 home visits. In addition, there were telephone consultations where information on available services and guidance was provided to both clients as well as regular members of the swiss benevolent society. The organization also held regular events, such as monthly gatherings in 6 locations (upper east side, upper west side, queens, long island, westchester and New Jersey). The attendance was between 8 and 15 people per event. There were also weekly exercise classes (via telephone) and movie afternoons (virtual). In december 6 holiday luncheons were held with a total attendance of 129 people.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 61% for direct work, and 39% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -28.3%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.38; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.9%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $894K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $173K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.