The Sacred Rights Sacred Song Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 900922034
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2018
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2012
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2164965744
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $0
- Expenses
- $55,720
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- FRANCINE GORDON (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- FRANCINE GORDON (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)
- DAVID FLESHLER (TREASURER & DIRECTOR)
- DORON KALIR (SECRETARY & DIRECTOR)
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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Sacred rights sacred song is operated exclusively for charitable and educational purposes as defined in the section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code. It's activities raise awareness and educate the general public regarding issues of religious pluralism and spiritual civil rights in the state of israel and other jewish communities; and to provide support to charitable organizations, including religious institutions, that promote and seek to facilitate such religious pluralism and spiritual civil rights.a primary goal of srss is to educate the american jewish community about the conflicts within israeli society that exist as a result of the clash between public jewish law, and the democratic ideals that permit a more egalitarian jewish spiritual life.
What it reported doing in 2018
The organization is completely dissolved as of 12/28/18. Therefore, there were no program activities held. However, final assets were distributed out to the jewish federation of cleveland.
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
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 7
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: Limited
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd 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: -26.1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -35.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 8 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2013 to 2018
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.