United Children's Education Foundation

Legal name: United Childrens Education Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814560853
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Brooklyn, NY, United States
Phone
2126410501
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$666,763
Expenses
$581,251
Assets
$519,823
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACK A KASSIN (PRESIDENT)
  • SAM SASSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOE LEVY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SAMMY ESSES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SAMMY ESSES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $165,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The United Children’s Education Foundation was created to unite community leaders and businesses to support its yeshivot and provide equal opportunity for children in the community. Whether it’s through your business, online shopping, or even with your generous donation, please help support The United Children’s Education Foundation so we can help support our community. THE UCEF MISSION A number of years ago, several community leaders realized that something needed to be done: the tuition crisis had come to a head. Together, they devised a new school of thought which would unite our community and businesses to support our yeshivot. Their innovative plan was designed to provide equal opportunity for the children in our community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Supporting the programs of ucef fund inc by funding scholarshipprograms for children attending orthodox jewish religious and education institutions meeting certain eligibility requirements, including financial restrictions on their family income.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 76% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 95% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.4%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.8%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 81.4% of revenue deployed · 93.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $543K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $165K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.