The Menorah Legacy Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
436049318
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Overland Park, KS, USA
Phone
9139818866
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,952
Expenses
$351,428
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jeffrey Kramer MD (President)
  • Brian Scharf (Vice President Investments)
  • Dan Somberg PhD (Vice President Grants)
  • Howard Wizig (Executive Vice President)
  • Diane Azorsky (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Diane Azorsky (Executive Director): $31,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The primary mission of the Foundation is to support programs that foster the delivery, quality, or affordability of healthcare or healthcare-related social services, i.e. services that promote physical or mental health in the Jewish community. The Foundation's secondary mission is to support human and social services that may be unrelated to healthcare but that foster or maintain a vibrant Jewish community.In the greater Kansas City community, the Foundation's mission is to support programs that proactively improve health and wellness by fostering transformational change in individual or community behaviors. We refer to the focus as "Healthy for Life".See schedule O regarding merger during 2016.

What it reported doing in 2016

To provide support for programs impacting healthcare, health-related services and human services in the greater Kansas City metropolitan area. See detail of grants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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 the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 70.3%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -2,250.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.8%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -63.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -32.4% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -42.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 70.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $247K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $31K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.