Yeb Educational Programs Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
451606975
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2012, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Teaneck, NJ, USA
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.
Affiliation
Judaism

Reported finances

Revenue
$77,346
Expenses
$77,539
Assets
$8,108
Liabilities
$127,582

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • YEDIDYA BERZON (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • YEDIDYA BERZON (PRESIDENT)
  • ADAM MERMELSTEIN (TRUSTEE)
  • DANNY POSSENHEIMER (TRUSTEE)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of yeb educational programs is to increase jewish awareness and education and to further charitable, educational and religious purposes

What it reported doing in 2016

Support for educational institutions in israel

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.2%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 15.74; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -17.6% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -38.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.