Yaysh Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 933469431
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Glastonbury, CT, USA
- Phone
- 8608363140
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $72,644
- Expenses
- $29,440
- Assets
- $86,394
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Sarah Kaprove (President)
- Amy Steinberg (Vice President)
- Lisa Wallace (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Sarah Kaprove (President)
- Amy Steinberg (Vice President)
- Lisa Wallace (Vice President)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Yaysh, Inc. is a charitbale organization organized for religious, charitable and educational purposes. The organizaiton is dedicated to educating and inspiring Jewish women and women raising Jewish children to be involved in the Greater Hartford Jewish community and to advance the Greater Hartford Jewish Community through education and community building. Our programs provide educational opportunities for Jewish womena and women raising Jewish children to further this mission, including an educational trip to Israel. Activities include meetings, community events, continuing education and other activities to advance these goals.
What it reported doing in 2025
Community Awareness/Outreach: Judaica crafting event for 58 women consisting of alumnae, potentail future trip participants and other local women of the Jewish community. This program helped to bring awareness of our organizaiton and enhanced our community buiilding efforts.
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
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 47
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 30.2%; rating input score 30
- Program expense ratio: 74.5%; rating input score 75
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 59.5%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.93; rating input score 74; 74th 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: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 30.2% of revenue deployed · 74.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $22K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.