The Nesiya Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363494706
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Jerusalem Israel, NY, IS
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.
Affiliation
Judaism

Reported finances

Revenue
$214,147
Expenses
$176,922
Assets
$127,888
Liabilities
$12,314

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARLES HERMAN (EXECUTIVE DI): $20,042 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To involve jews & others in the developement of jewish culture by offering programs for young people & adults from diverse backgrounds to explore jewish texts, traditions & culture through experiences in israel.

What it reported doing in 2013

Summer program - the kehillah experience six week program for young adults from the united states and israel. This is the flagship program of nesiya. Program for young people & adults from diverse backgrounds to explore jewish texts traditions & culture through experiences in israel. Participants met artists, educators, nature guides, activists, and community leaders who worked side by side with them creating, exploring, learning and building. Due to the disability of the managing director and a reduction in donations the summer program was greatly reduced in 2013.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of total spending goes to programs 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: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.5%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 68.4%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $18.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.4%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.3%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -71.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -54.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.5% of revenue deployed · 68.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $121K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2011 to 2013
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.