Us Middle East Project Inc

What it reported doing in 2024

Critical analyses of u.s./middle east policy towards conflict de-escalation and resolution in the region the u.s./middle east project (usmep) held an in-person meeting during this period in london. Given the ongoing intensity of post-october 7th events, only one in-person meeting was held during this timeframe as it continued to be difficult for many board members from the region to travel. However, throughout this period, usmep president, daniel levy, continued to brief board members on a one-on-one basis. On april 29-30, 2025, the usmep organized an in-person convening in london with usmep board members and senior advisors participants included usmep board members and senior advisors as well as other relevant stakeholders including leading government officials and middle east experts from various institutions in the u.s. And beyond. Attendees included: fouad alghanim, chairman, fouad alghanim & sons group of companies hanan ashrawi, former member, p.l.o. Executive committee (attended virtually) seth anziska, usmep visiting fellow; mohamed s. Farsi-polonsky lecturer in jewish-muslim relations at university college london sawsan asfari, usmep board member; co-founder and trustee, asfari foundation; executive director, galilee foundation amjad bseisu, chief executive, enquest plc efraim halevy, chairman, israel national center for jewish history peter joseph, chairman, trenton biogas llc (tbl daniel levy, president of the u.s./middle east project frank lowenstein, former u.s. Special envoy for middle east peace robert malley, senior fellow at the yale jackson school anne patterson, former assistant secretary for the middle east and north africa thomas r. Pickering, senior counselor, albright stonebridge group (attended virtually) henry siegman, president emeritus, u.s. /middle east project (attended virtually) ramez sousou, chairman, daycrest holdings the purpose of this meeting was to review u.s.-middle east policy and that of other actors and options for mitigating or advancing resolutions of crises and conflicts in each of the major areas of interest in the region, notably working to resolve the israeli/palestinian conflict, as well as issues related to afghanistan, yemen, iran, iraq, syria, lebanon, the gulf and egypt. At this meeting, the discussion points were focused primarily on events since october 7th and included some of the following sessions: syria & lebanon: analysis and state of play middle east priorities in a shifting geopolitical landscape - the view from westminster legal accountability as a driver of change in israel-palestine new u.s and geopolitical realities and their impact on israel-palestine/the region palestine-israel - where do we stand, is there a way out and identifying pressure points iran-u.s. - inching closer to a deal or to a clash? Middle east priorities in a shifting geopolitical landscape implications of u.s.-europe tensions the usmep has been engaged in a consistent flow of private briefings, policy notes and offering of advice to key stakeholders in the u.s., europe, and the region. That work seeks to provide updated situation assessments alongside policy options. Part of that work is conducted with the involvement of members of the usmep board and senior advisors. Notably that has focused on efforts to advance peace, de-escalation, accountability, and equal rights.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
• Program expense ratio: 69.6%; rating input score 70
• Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Scored; rating input score 0
• Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
• Major donor itemization: Limited
• Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

• Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
  • Whistleblower policy: Fail
  • Document-retention policy: Fail
  • CEO compensation review process: Pass
  • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
  • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
  • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
  • Audit committee oversight: Missing
  • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

• Operating margin: -106.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 37.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings