The Rabbi Sacks Legacy Corp
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 465102221
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2014
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2128401166
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Judaism
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,408,615
- Expenses
- $2,727,163
- Assets
- $102,601
- Liabilities
- $30,005
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANDREW KLABER (PRESIDENT)
- JONATHAN CANNON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFIER)
Highest reported compensation
- JONATHAN CANNON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFIER): $210,000 total reported compensation
- JEREMY BRUCE (DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMMING): $207,813 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The charity provides religious outreach to the jewish community across the us through the lectures and online material of emeritus chief rabbi lord jonathan sacks based on his torah series covenant & conversation.
What it reported doing in 2025
To provide religious outreach to jewish people.
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 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 10
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.4%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 70.1%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Pass
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -13.2%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15.3%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 21.8% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 22.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79.4% of revenue deployed · 70.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $210K · 17 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $337K reported
- Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.