The Acheinu Fund Inc Co Bernath & Rosenberg Pc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472421497
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Cedarhurst, NY, USA
Phone
2122211140
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,906
Expenses
$13,969
Assets
$76,203

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BARUCH CYWIAK (President)
  • BARUCH TRAVITSKY (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • BARUCH CYWIAK (President)
  • BARUCH TRAVITSKY (Vice President)
  • BENJAMIN BERGER (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To provide financial assistance to qualified recipients so that these recipients can develop as persons into upstanding members of society. We will do this by helping recipients meet their basic needs of food, clothing, and shelter as well as medical and social needs. We will place an emphasis on assistance to widows, widowers and orphans, but will assist other needy recipients when warranted. To date we have funded food, clothing, medical expenses and educational needs for indigent children.

What it reported doing in 2024

Assistance to needy grooms and brides

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -380.7%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.46; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.8% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.