MISSION:
Established in 1981, “Friends of the Israel Defense
Forces (FIDF), www.fidf.org, initiates and helps support
social, educational, cultural and recreational programs and
facilities for the young men and women soldiers of Israel who
defend the Jewish homeland. FIDF also provides support for
the families of fallen soldiers.” (FIDF website)
FINANACIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator (www.charitynavigator.com),
FIDF has an overall rating of four stars (four stars is the highest
rating.) Charity Navigator provides the following breakdown
of FIDF based on 990 tax returns through fiscal year 2008:
Overall Rating ****
Organizational Efficiency:
Program Expenses 78.8%
Administrative Expenses 3.3%
Fundraising Expenses 17.7%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.15
(FIDF spends $0.15 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating **
Organizational Capacity:
Primary Revenue Growth 13.4%
Program Expenses Growth 19.6%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 2.65
(FIDF can sustain itself for 1.72 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ****
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its National Director, Yitzhak Gershon
was $111,649 which was 0.28% of expenses. For purposes
of comparison, compensation for Ruth Messenger, the
President of the American Jewish World Service, was
$218,625 which was 0.76% of expenses. Percentagewise,
these are very low compensation figures for a nonprofit
president.
ANALYSIS OF FORM 990 TAX RETURN:
As of fiscal year 2008, FIDF had net assets of $70,573,765
(Part I, Summary: Line 22) up from 68,247,687 in FY 2007
and total assets of $97,924,553 (Part I, Summary: Line 20)
up from $79,933,154 in FY 2007. FIDF had cash non-interest
bearing $1,500,220 (Part X, Balance Sheet, Line 1), savings
and temporary cash investments of $21,582,566 (Part X, Line 2),
investments of publicly traded securities of $8,935,933
(Part X, line 11), investments of other securities of $19,303,182
(Part X, Line 12). It had pledges and grants receivable of
$32,255,006 (Part X, Line 3.) FIDF had fixed assets of land,
buildings and equipment less accumulated depreciation of
$154,351 (Part X, Line 10c).
FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY EVALUATION:
According to our PET (Philanthropy Economic Transparency)
Index, this blog’s financial transparency rating
system of information provided by the nonprofit on its
own website, FIDF has a transparency rating of 1 star
(6 stars is the highest rating.) Of the following six
items, FIDF provides one of the following metrics on its
website, Item #6, its rating from Charity Navigator.
FIDF also provides a letter from Charity Navigator in which
it is congratulated for being in the top 5% of all nonprofits
that achieved a four star rating for five consecutive years.
1) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
2) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
3) The nonprofit’s annual report
4) The nonprofit’s investment philosophy
5) A breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
6) The nonprofit’s rating from Charity Navigator
PET RATING: *
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
As of fiscal year 2008, FIDF was a moderately, financially
efficient nonprofit with excellent organizational capacity.
The recent financial turmoil on Wall Street has also affected
the relationship between donor and non-profit. The turmoil
has caused donors to become uncertain and more selective
in giving to non-profits. Non-profits that are transparent
about their finances will regain the lost trust of its donors
sooner than those non-profits that are not transparent about
their finances. FIDF discloses very little financial information
on its web site. It should provide an audited financial statement,
its annual report and its most recently filed 990 tax return on its
website. FIDF’s planned giving program entails gift annuities,
charitable remainder trusts, and endowments. It would benefit
from offering a donor advised fund program to its friends
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Sunday, August 29, 2010
BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY
Mission: “Founded in 1948, Brandeis University (BU) is one
of the youngest private research universities, as well as the
only nonsectarian Jewish-sponsored college or university in
the country. As a research university, Brandeis is dedicated
to the advancement of the humanities, arts and social, natural
and physical sciences. As a liberal arts college, Brandeis
affirms the importance of a broad and critical education in
enriching the lives of students and preparing them for full
participation in a changing society, capable of promoting
their own welfare, yet remaining deeply concerned about the
welfare of others.”
(Charity Navigator Website: http://www.charitynavigator.org)
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, BU has an overall rating
of four stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity
Navigator provides the following breakdown of BU based on
990 tax returns through fiscal year 2008:
Overall Rating ****
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 87.4%
Administrative Expenses 9.0%
Fundraising Expenses 3.4%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.11
(BU spends $0.11 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ***
Organizational Capacity:
Primary Revenue Growth 6.0%
Program Expenses Growth 6.6%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 2.65
(BU can sustain itself for 2.65 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ****
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its President, Jehuda Reinharz was $534,528 which was 0.16% of expenses. For purposes of comparison, compensation for Ruth Messenger, the President of the American Jewish World Service, was $218,625 which was 0.76% of expenses. Percentagewise, these are very low compensation figures for a nonprofit president.
Analysis of Form 990 Tax Return:
As of fiscal year 2009 (2008 990 tax return), BU had total net
assets of $771,801,174 ( Part X - Balance sheet line 33) in
FY 2009 down from $945,752,008 in FY 2008 and total assets
of $1,155,725,455 (Part X -Balance sheet line 16) down from
$1,243,898,599, in FY 2008. BU had endowment funds of
$558,516,000 in FY 2009 (Schedule D, Part V, Endowment
Funds) down from $712,132,000 in FY 2008. It had 17 donor
advised funds with $6,451,072 in aggregate contributions and
$5,981,135 in aggregate grants made from those funds during
the year; the aggregate value of all donor advised funds at the
end of the year was $2,202,928 (Schedule D, Part I.)
FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY EVALUATION:
According to our PET (Philanthropy Economic Transparency)
Index, this blog’s financial transparency rating
system of information provided by the nonprofit on its
own website, BU has a transparency rating of 1 star
(6 stars is the highest rating.) Of the following six
items, BU provides one item of the following metrics on its
website. Item #5 - operating expenses can be found in the
University’s Budget in the Office of Budget and Planning
section under Links in the Sites A-Z Directory under
Finance and Administration.
1) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
2) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
3) The nonprofit’s annual report
4) The nonprofit’s investment philosophy
5) A breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
6) The nonprofit’s rating from Charity Navigator
Discussion:
As of fiscal year 2009, Brandeis was a financially
efficient nonprofit with excellent organizational capacity.
The recent financial turmoil on Wall Street has also affected the relationship between donor and non-profit. The turmoil has caused donors to become uncertain and more selective in giving to non-profits. Non-profits that are transparent about their finances will regain the lost trust of its donors sooner than those non-profits that are not transparent about their finances. Brandeis discloses very little financial information on its web site. It should provide
an audited financial statement, its annual report and its most
recently filed 990 tax return on its website. Brandeis has
over 46,000 alumni and only 17 donor advised funds. A
duel strategy of financial transparency and better marketing
of its donor advised funds will result in increased giving
to Brandeis.
of the youngest private research universities, as well as the
only nonsectarian Jewish-sponsored college or university in
the country. As a research university, Brandeis is dedicated
to the advancement of the humanities, arts and social, natural
and physical sciences. As a liberal arts college, Brandeis
affirms the importance of a broad and critical education in
enriching the lives of students and preparing them for full
participation in a changing society, capable of promoting
their own welfare, yet remaining deeply concerned about the
welfare of others.”
(Charity Navigator Website: http://www.charitynavigator.org)
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, BU has an overall rating
of four stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity
Navigator provides the following breakdown of BU based on
990 tax returns through fiscal year 2008:
Overall Rating ****
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 87.4%
Administrative Expenses 9.0%
Fundraising Expenses 3.4%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.11
(BU spends $0.11 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ***
Organizational Capacity:
Primary Revenue Growth 6.0%
Program Expenses Growth 6.6%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 2.65
(BU can sustain itself for 2.65 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ****
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its President, Jehuda Reinharz was $534,528 which was 0.16% of expenses. For purposes of comparison, compensation for Ruth Messenger, the President of the American Jewish World Service, was $218,625 which was 0.76% of expenses. Percentagewise, these are very low compensation figures for a nonprofit president.
Analysis of Form 990 Tax Return:
As of fiscal year 2009 (2008 990 tax return), BU had total net
assets of $771,801,174 ( Part X - Balance sheet line 33) in
FY 2009 down from $945,752,008 in FY 2008 and total assets
of $1,155,725,455 (Part X -Balance sheet line 16) down from
$1,243,898,599, in FY 2008. BU had endowment funds of
$558,516,000 in FY 2009 (Schedule D, Part V, Endowment
Funds) down from $712,132,000 in FY 2008. It had 17 donor
advised funds with $6,451,072 in aggregate contributions and
$5,981,135 in aggregate grants made from those funds during
the year; the aggregate value of all donor advised funds at the
end of the year was $2,202,928 (Schedule D, Part I.)
FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY EVALUATION:
According to our PET (Philanthropy Economic Transparency)
Index, this blog’s financial transparency rating
system of information provided by the nonprofit on its
own website, BU has a transparency rating of 1 star
(6 stars is the highest rating.) Of the following six
items, BU provides one item of the following metrics on its
website. Item #5 - operating expenses can be found in the
University’s Budget in the Office of Budget and Planning
section under Links in the Sites A-Z Directory under
Finance and Administration.
1) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
2) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
3) The nonprofit’s annual report
4) The nonprofit’s investment philosophy
5) A breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
6) The nonprofit’s rating from Charity Navigator
Discussion:
As of fiscal year 2009, Brandeis was a financially
efficient nonprofit with excellent organizational capacity.
The recent financial turmoil on Wall Street has also affected the relationship between donor and non-profit. The turmoil has caused donors to become uncertain and more selective in giving to non-profits. Non-profits that are transparent about their finances will regain the lost trust of its donors sooner than those non-profits that are not transparent about their finances. Brandeis discloses very little financial information on its web site. It should provide
an audited financial statement, its annual report and its most
recently filed 990 tax return on its website. Brandeis has
over 46,000 alumni and only 17 donor advised funds. A
duel strategy of financial transparency and better marketing
of its donor advised funds will result in increased giving
to Brandeis.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
YESHIVA UNIVERSITY
Mission: “Now in its second century, Yeshiva University (YU) ranks among the nation's leading academic research institutions. It embraces the heritage of the best of western civilization, along with the ancient traditions of Jewish law and life. YU's undergraduate schools and divisions include Yeshiva College, Stern College for Women, and Sy Syms School of Business. We bring wisdom to life by combining the finest, contemporary academic education with the timeless teachings of Torah. Nearly 7,000 students, including 2,798 undergraduates, from 38 states and 55 countries, study at YU's four campuses.” (Charity Navigator Website: http://www.charitynavigator.org)
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, YU has an overall rating
of four stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity
Navigator provides the following breakdown of YU based on 990 tax returns through fiscal year 2008:
Overall Rating ****
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 92.7%
Administrative Expenses 4.2%
Fundraising Expenses 3.0%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.06
(YU spends 0.06 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ****
Organizational Capacity:
Primary Revenue Growth 9.1%
Program Expenses Growth 8.1%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 0.62
(YU can sustain itself for 0.62 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ****
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its President, Richard Joel was $834,000 which was 0.12% of expenses. For purposes of comparison, compensation for Ruth Messenger, the President of the American Jewish World Service, was $218,625 which was 0.76% of expenses. Percentagewise, these are very low compensation figures for a nonprofit president.
Analysis of Form 990 Tax Return:
As of fiscal year 2008 (2007 990 tax return), YU had net assets of $2,057,154,163 (down from 2,187,792,963 in FY 2007) and total assets of $2,500,472,720 (down from $2,621,680,265 in FY 2007.) YU had investments of publicly traded securities of $264,895,491 (990 Tax return – line 54a) and it had investments of other securities $1,136,265,612 (line 54b). YU had cash non- interest bearing
investments of $333,959 (line 45) and savings and temporary
cash investments of $14,486,928 (line 46.) It had pledges
receivable less allowance for doubtful accounts of $10,687,105
(line 48b.) YU had fixed assets of land, buildings and
equipment less accumulated depreciation of $718,709,728
(line 57c) and other investments of $17,730,142 (line 56.)
FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY EVALUATION:
According to our PET (Philanthropy Economic Transparency)
Index, this blog’s financial transparency rating
system of information provided by the nonprofit on its
own website, YU has a transparency rating of 2 stars
(6 stars is the highest rating.) Of the following six
items, YU provides items 3 and 5 of the following
metrics on its website:
1) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
2) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
3) The nonprofit’s annual report
4) The nonprofit’s investment philosophy
5) A breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
6) The nonprofit’s rating from Charity Navigator
Discussion:
As of fiscal year 2008, YU was a financially
efficient nonprofit with high organizational capacity.
The recent financial turmoil on Wall Street has also affected the relationship between donor and non-profit. The turmoil has caused donors to become uncertain and more selective in giving to non-profits. Non-profits that are transparent about their finances will regain the lost trust of its donors sooner than those non-profits that are not transparent about their finances. Though YU is financially transparent in that it does disclose financial information on its web site, in order to reach out to more selective donors, YU should be even more transparent about its finances. YU should provide an audited financial statement and its most recently filed tax return on its web site
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, YU has an overall rating
of four stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity
Navigator provides the following breakdown of YU based on 990 tax returns through fiscal year 2008:
Overall Rating ****
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 92.7%
Administrative Expenses 4.2%
Fundraising Expenses 3.0%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.06
(YU spends 0.06 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ****
Organizational Capacity:
Primary Revenue Growth 9.1%
Program Expenses Growth 8.1%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 0.62
(YU can sustain itself for 0.62 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ****
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its President, Richard Joel was $834,000 which was 0.12% of expenses. For purposes of comparison, compensation for Ruth Messenger, the President of the American Jewish World Service, was $218,625 which was 0.76% of expenses. Percentagewise, these are very low compensation figures for a nonprofit president.
Analysis of Form 990 Tax Return:
As of fiscal year 2008 (2007 990 tax return), YU had net assets of $2,057,154,163 (down from 2,187,792,963 in FY 2007) and total assets of $2,500,472,720 (down from $2,621,680,265 in FY 2007.) YU had investments of publicly traded securities of $264,895,491 (990 Tax return – line 54a) and it had investments of other securities $1,136,265,612 (line 54b). YU had cash non- interest bearing
investments of $333,959 (line 45) and savings and temporary
cash investments of $14,486,928 (line 46.) It had pledges
receivable less allowance for doubtful accounts of $10,687,105
(line 48b.) YU had fixed assets of land, buildings and
equipment less accumulated depreciation of $718,709,728
(line 57c) and other investments of $17,730,142 (line 56.)
FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY EVALUATION:
According to our PET (Philanthropy Economic Transparency)
Index, this blog’s financial transparency rating
system of information provided by the nonprofit on its
own website, YU has a transparency rating of 2 stars
(6 stars is the highest rating.) Of the following six
items, YU provides items 3 and 5 of the following
metrics on its website:
1) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
2) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
3) The nonprofit’s annual report
4) The nonprofit’s investment philosophy
5) A breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
6) The nonprofit’s rating from Charity Navigator
Discussion:
As of fiscal year 2008, YU was a financially
efficient nonprofit with high organizational capacity.
The recent financial turmoil on Wall Street has also affected the relationship between donor and non-profit. The turmoil has caused donors to become uncertain and more selective in giving to non-profits. Non-profits that are transparent about their finances will regain the lost trust of its donors sooner than those non-profits that are not transparent about their finances. Though YU is financially transparent in that it does disclose financial information on its web site, in order to reach out to more selective donors, YU should be even more transparent about its finances. YU should provide an audited financial statement and its most recently filed tax return on its web site
Saturday, October 3, 2009
American Friends Yad Eliezer
MISSION:
“American Friends of Yad Eliezer (AFYE), www. yadeliezer.org
provides financial aid and support to Yad Eliezer. Yad Eliezer,
founded in 1980, is the largest anti-hunger agency in Israel. Yad
Eliezer's mandate is to help families cope with financial
difficulties and to empower them to break through the cycle of
poverty and achieve self-sufficiency. Our objective is to combat
poverty at its root, through an array of programs that provide
critical short-term relief, while facilitating long-term recovery.
Each component of Yad Eliezer's comprehensive welfare system
- nationwide distribution of essential food, clothing and household
items, job training, and adolescent mentoring programs - contributes
toward economic recovery and social development.”
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, (http://www.charitynavigator.org)
America’s leading charity evaluator, AFYE has an overall rating
of four stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity
Navigator provides the following breakdown of AFYE based on
990 tax returns through fiscal year 2007:
Overall Rating ****
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 95.7%
Administrative Expenses 0.7%
Fundraising Expenses 3.4%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.03
(AFYE spends 0.03 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ****
Organizational Capacity:
Primary Revenue Growth 15.2%
Program Expenses Growth 17.8%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 0.20
(AFYE can sustain itself for 0.20 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ****
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its CEO, Sori Tropper, was $0. For
purposes of comparison, compensation for Ruth Messenger,
the President of the American Jewish World Service, was
$218,625 which was 0.76% of expenses.
As of fiscal year 2007, AFYE had net assets of $2,120,539
(up from 1,445,855 in 2006) and total assets of $2,120,539
(up from $1,450,501 in 2006.) AFYE had investments of
publicly traded securities of $1,241,340 (990 Tax return –
line 54a) and it had investments of other securities of $0
(line 54b). AFYE had cash non- interest bearing
investments of $829,620 (line 45) and savings and temporary
cash investments of $0 (line 46.) It had pledges
receivable less allowance for doubtful accounts of $0
(line 48b.) AFYE had fixed assets of land, buildings and
equipment less accumulated depreciation of $48,870
(line 57c) and other investments of $0 (line 56.)
FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY EVALUATION:
According to our PET (Philanthropy Economic Transparency)
Index, this blog’s financial transparency rating
system of information provided by the nonprofit on its
own website, AFYE has a transparency rating of 4 stars
(6 stars is the highest rating.) Of the following six
items, AFYE provide items 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the following
metrics on its website:
1) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
2) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
3) The nonprofit’s annual report
4) An annual statement of achievements in each of the
three main programs supported by the nonprofit
5) A breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
6) The nonprofit’s rating from Charity Navigator
DISCUSSION:
As of fiscal year 2007, AFYE was a financially
efficient nonprofit with high organizational capacity.
Though AFYE had no direct exposure to Madoff
investments, the downturn on Wall Street will cause
its donors to reduce their support. As of fiscal year
2007, a larger percentage of its net assets (57%) were
in publicly traded securities and a smaller percentage
(38%) were in safe liquid assets; this aggressive
investment strategy combined with its poor working
capital ratio of 0.20 years will make it difficult for
AFYE to continue to provide support for social and
job training services in Israel.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The recent financial turmoil, caused by the Wall Street
and Madoff scandals, has also affected the relationship
between donor and non-profit. The turmoil has caused
donors to become uncertain and more selective in giving to
non-profits. Non-profits that are transparent about their
finances will regain the lost trust of its donors sooner than
those non-profits that are not transparent about their
finances. Though AFYE is financially transparent in that it
does disclose financial information on its web site, in order
to reach out to more selective donors, AFYE should be even
more transparent about its finances. AFYE should provide
an audited financial statement and its most recently filed
tax return on its web site.
“American Friends of Yad Eliezer (AFYE), www. yadeliezer.org
provides financial aid and support to Yad Eliezer. Yad Eliezer,
founded in 1980, is the largest anti-hunger agency in Israel. Yad
Eliezer's mandate is to help families cope with financial
difficulties and to empower them to break through the cycle of
poverty and achieve self-sufficiency. Our objective is to combat
poverty at its root, through an array of programs that provide
critical short-term relief, while facilitating long-term recovery.
Each component of Yad Eliezer's comprehensive welfare system
- nationwide distribution of essential food, clothing and household
items, job training, and adolescent mentoring programs - contributes
toward economic recovery and social development.”
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, (http://www.charitynavigator.org)
America’s leading charity evaluator, AFYE has an overall rating
of four stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity
Navigator provides the following breakdown of AFYE based on
990 tax returns through fiscal year 2007:
Overall Rating ****
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 95.7%
Administrative Expenses 0.7%
Fundraising Expenses 3.4%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.03
(AFYE spends 0.03 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ****
Organizational Capacity:
Primary Revenue Growth 15.2%
Program Expenses Growth 17.8%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 0.20
(AFYE can sustain itself for 0.20 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ****
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its CEO, Sori Tropper, was $0. For
purposes of comparison, compensation for Ruth Messenger,
the President of the American Jewish World Service, was
$218,625 which was 0.76% of expenses.
As of fiscal year 2007, AFYE had net assets of $2,120,539
(up from 1,445,855 in 2006) and total assets of $2,120,539
(up from $1,450,501 in 2006.) AFYE had investments of
publicly traded securities of $1,241,340 (990 Tax return –
line 54a) and it had investments of other securities of $0
(line 54b). AFYE had cash non- interest bearing
investments of $829,620 (line 45) and savings and temporary
cash investments of $0 (line 46.) It had pledges
receivable less allowance for doubtful accounts of $0
(line 48b.) AFYE had fixed assets of land, buildings and
equipment less accumulated depreciation of $48,870
(line 57c) and other investments of $0 (line 56.)
FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY EVALUATION:
According to our PET (Philanthropy Economic Transparency)
Index, this blog’s financial transparency rating
system of information provided by the nonprofit on its
own website, AFYE has a transparency rating of 4 stars
(6 stars is the highest rating.) Of the following six
items, AFYE provide items 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the following
metrics on its website:
1) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
2) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
3) The nonprofit’s annual report
4) An annual statement of achievements in each of the
three main programs supported by the nonprofit
5) A breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
6) The nonprofit’s rating from Charity Navigator
DISCUSSION:
As of fiscal year 2007, AFYE was a financially
efficient nonprofit with high organizational capacity.
Though AFYE had no direct exposure to Madoff
investments, the downturn on Wall Street will cause
its donors to reduce their support. As of fiscal year
2007, a larger percentage of its net assets (57%) were
in publicly traded securities and a smaller percentage
(38%) were in safe liquid assets; this aggressive
investment strategy combined with its poor working
capital ratio of 0.20 years will make it difficult for
AFYE to continue to provide support for social and
job training services in Israel.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The recent financial turmoil, caused by the Wall Street
and Madoff scandals, has also affected the relationship
between donor and non-profit. The turmoil has caused
donors to become uncertain and more selective in giving to
non-profits. Non-profits that are transparent about their
finances will regain the lost trust of its donors sooner than
those non-profits that are not transparent about their
finances. Though AFYE is financially transparent in that it
does disclose financial information on its web site, in order
to reach out to more selective donors, AFYE should be even
more transparent about its finances. AFYE should provide
an audited financial statement and its most recently filed
tax return on its web site.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
AMIT
MISSION:
“Founded in 1925, AMIT is the world's leading supporter
of religious Zionist education and social services for
Israel's children and youth, nurturing and educating Israeli
children to become productive, contributing members of
society. Our more than 70 schools and programs constitute
Israel's only government-recognized network of religious
Jewish education, incorporating academic and technological
studies. These also include youth villages and facilities
for children in foster care. At present, AMIT's more than
20,000 children come largely from impoverished and/or
dysfunctional families; significant numbers are new
Ethiopian and Russian immigrants, as well as young people
of Sephardic backgrounds.”
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, (http://www.charitynavigator.org)
America’s leading charity evaluator, AMIT has an overall rating
of three stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity
Navigator provides the following breakdown of AMIT based on
990 tax returns through fiscal year 2007:
Overall Rating ***
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 79.6%
Administrative Expenses 13.1%
Fundraising Expenses 7.2%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.06
(AMIT spends 0.06 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ****
Organizational Capacity:
Primary Revenue Growth 20.0%
Program Expenses Growth -8.5%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 0.92
(AMIT can sustain itself for 0.92 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ***
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its Executive Vice President, Arnold Gerson,
was $287,158 which was 3.58% of expenses. For purposes
of comparison, compensation for Ruth Messenger, the
President of the American Jewish World Service, was
$218,625 which was 0.76% of expenses.
As of fiscal year 2007, AMIT had net assets of $17,798,411
(up from 17,487,511 in 2006) and total assets of $19,998,800
(up from $19,420,466 in 2006.) AMIT had investments of
publicly traded securities of $3,128,290 (990 Tax return –
line 54a) and it had investments of other securities of $83,772
(line 54b). AMIT had cash non- interest bearing
investments of $1,033,960 (line 45) and savings and temporary
cash investments of $3,541,875 (line 46.) It had pledges
receivable less allowance for doubtful accounts of $12,500
(line 48b.)AMIT had fixed assets of land, buildings and
equipment less accumulated depreciation of $10,580,195
(line 57c) and other investments of $0 (line 56.)
PET (Philanthropy Economic Transparency) Index:
According to this blog’s financial transparency rating
system of information provided by the nonprofit on its
own website, AMIT has a transparency rating of 3 stars
(6 stars is the highest rating.) Of the following six
items, AMIT provide items 1, 2 and 4 of the following
metrics on its website:
1) The nonprofit’s Charity Navigator rating
2) A breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
3) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
4) The nonprofit’s annual report
5) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
6) The nonprofit’s investment philosophy
DISCUSSION:
As of fiscal year 2007, AMIT was a financially
efficient nonprofit with high organizational capacity.
Though AMIT had no direct exposure to Madoff
investments, the downturn on Wall Street will cause
its donors to reduce their support. As of fiscal year
2007, a small percentage of its net assets (17%) were
in publicly traded securities and a larger percentage
(25%) were in safe liquid assets; this conservative
investment strategy combined with its good working
capital ratio of 0.92 years will help AMIT weather
the Wall Street meltdown and allow it to continue to
provide support for educational and social services
in Israel.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The recent financial turmoil, caused by the Wall Street
and Madoff scandals, has also affected the relationship
between donor and non-profit. The turmoil has caused
donors to become uncertain and more selective in giving to
non-profits. Non-profits that are transparent about their
finances will regain the lost trust of its donors sooner than
those non-profits that are not transparent about their
finances. Though AMIT does provide financial information
on its web site, in order to reach out to more selective donors,
AMIT should be even more transparent about its finances.
AMIT should provide an audited financial statement and its
most recently filed tax return on its web site.
“Founded in 1925, AMIT is the world's leading supporter
of religious Zionist education and social services for
Israel's children and youth, nurturing and educating Israeli
children to become productive, contributing members of
society. Our more than 70 schools and programs constitute
Israel's only government-recognized network of religious
Jewish education, incorporating academic and technological
studies. These also include youth villages and facilities
for children in foster care. At present, AMIT's more than
20,000 children come largely from impoverished and/or
dysfunctional families; significant numbers are new
Ethiopian and Russian immigrants, as well as young people
of Sephardic backgrounds.”
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, (http://www.charitynavigator.org)
America’s leading charity evaluator, AMIT has an overall rating
of three stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity
Navigator provides the following breakdown of AMIT based on
990 tax returns through fiscal year 2007:
Overall Rating ***
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 79.6%
Administrative Expenses 13.1%
Fundraising Expenses 7.2%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.06
(AMIT spends 0.06 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ****
Organizational Capacity:
Primary Revenue Growth 20.0%
Program Expenses Growth -8.5%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 0.92
(AMIT can sustain itself for 0.92 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ***
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its Executive Vice President, Arnold Gerson,
was $287,158 which was 3.58% of expenses. For purposes
of comparison, compensation for Ruth Messenger, the
President of the American Jewish World Service, was
$218,625 which was 0.76% of expenses.
As of fiscal year 2007, AMIT had net assets of $17,798,411
(up from 17,487,511 in 2006) and total assets of $19,998,800
(up from $19,420,466 in 2006.) AMIT had investments of
publicly traded securities of $3,128,290 (990 Tax return –
line 54a) and it had investments of other securities of $83,772
(line 54b). AMIT had cash non- interest bearing
investments of $1,033,960 (line 45) and savings and temporary
cash investments of $3,541,875 (line 46.) It had pledges
receivable less allowance for doubtful accounts of $12,500
(line 48b.)AMIT had fixed assets of land, buildings and
equipment less accumulated depreciation of $10,580,195
(line 57c) and other investments of $0 (line 56.)
PET (Philanthropy Economic Transparency) Index:
According to this blog’s financial transparency rating
system of information provided by the nonprofit on its
own website, AMIT has a transparency rating of 3 stars
(6 stars is the highest rating.) Of the following six
items, AMIT provide items 1, 2 and 4 of the following
metrics on its website:
1) The nonprofit’s Charity Navigator rating
2) A breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
3) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
4) The nonprofit’s annual report
5) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
6) The nonprofit’s investment philosophy
DISCUSSION:
As of fiscal year 2007, AMIT was a financially
efficient nonprofit with high organizational capacity.
Though AMIT had no direct exposure to Madoff
investments, the downturn on Wall Street will cause
its donors to reduce their support. As of fiscal year
2007, a small percentage of its net assets (17%) were
in publicly traded securities and a larger percentage
(25%) were in safe liquid assets; this conservative
investment strategy combined with its good working
capital ratio of 0.92 years will help AMIT weather
the Wall Street meltdown and allow it to continue to
provide support for educational and social services
in Israel.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The recent financial turmoil, caused by the Wall Street
and Madoff scandals, has also affected the relationship
between donor and non-profit. The turmoil has caused
donors to become uncertain and more selective in giving to
non-profits. Non-profits that are transparent about their
finances will regain the lost trust of its donors sooner than
those non-profits that are not transparent about their
finances. Though AMIT does provide financial information
on its web site, in order to reach out to more selective donors,
AMIT should be even more transparent about its finances.
AMIT should provide an audited financial statement and its
most recently filed tax return on its web site.
Monday, September 21, 2009
American Friends Alyn Hospital
MISSION:
“American Friends of ALYN Hospital (AFAH), www.alynus.org
supports Israel's premiere rehabilitation center for physically
disabled children, adolescents and young adults. ALYN Hospital
combines expertise and love so that each patient and family can
meet the challenges of living with disabilities and achieve the
highest possible level of mobility and independence. ALYN
Hospital, established over 50 years ago, is one of the world's
leading specialists in the active and intensive rehabilitation
of children with a broad range of physical disabilities and is
the only facility of its kind in Israel. The Hospital currently
has 93 beds for hospitalized patients, 100 beds for day-care
treatment and specialized out patient clinics which receive over
10,000 patient visits a year.”
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, (http://www.charitynavigator.org)
America’s leading charity evaluator, AFAH has an overall rating
of three stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity
Navigator provides the following breakdown of AFAH based on
990 tax returns through fiscal year 2006:
Overall Rating ***
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 84.2%
Administrative Expenses 4.1%
Fundraising Expenses 11.5%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.13
(AFAH spends 0.13 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ***
Organizational Capacity:
Primary Revenue Growth 17.0%
Program Expenses Growth 5.2%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 1.71
(AFAH can sustain itself for 1.71 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ****
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its Executive Director, Cathy Lanyard,
was $206,615 which was 5.85% of expenses. For purposes
of comparison, compensation for Ruth Messenger, the
President of the American Jewish World Service, was
$218,625 which was 0.76% of expenses.
As of fiscal year 2008, AFAH had net assets of $5,450,214
(down from 7,176,198 in 2007) and total assets of $5,508,989
(down from $7,219,210 in 2007.) AFAH had investments of
publicly traded securities of $3,524,025 (990 Tax return –
Part X: Balance sheet line 11) and it had investments of other
securities of $0 (line 12). AFAH had cash non- interest bearing
investments of $745,598 (line 1) and savings and temporary
cash investments of $0 (line 2.) It had pledges receivable
of $0 (line 3.) AFAH had fixed assets of land, buildings and
equipment less accumulated depreciation of $0 (line 10c) and
other investments of $0 (line 13.)
According to this blog’s financial transparency rating system
of information provided by the nonprofit on its own website,
AFAH has a transparency rating of 0 stars (6 stars is the highest
Rating.) Of the following six items, AFAH did not provide any
of this information on its website:
1) The nonprofit’s Charity Navigator rating
2) A pie-chart breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
3) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
4) The nonprofit’s annual report
5) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
6) The nonprofit’s investment philosophy
DISCUSSION:
As of fiscal year 2006, AFAH was a financially
efficient nonprofit with high organizational capacity.
As of fiscal year 2008. large percentage of its assets,
64%, were in publicly traded securities; this explains
why its net assets took a hit of 24% reflecting the
meltdown on Wall Street. meltdown. Though AFAH had
no direct exposure to Madoff investments, the downturn
on Wall Street will cause its donors to reduce their
support. Its excellent working capital ratio, of 1.71 years,
will help i t limit the amount it will have to reduce its
support of the ALYN Hospital in Israel.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The recent financial turmoil, caused by the Wall Street
and Madoff scandals, has also affected the relationship
between donor and non-profit. The turmoil has caused
donors to become uncertain and more selective in giving to
non-profits. Non-profits that are transparent about their
finances will regain the lost trust of its donors sooner than
those non-profits that are not transparent about their
finances. In order to reach out to more selective donors,
AFAH should be more transparent about its finances. AFAH
should provide additional financial information on its web site.
“American Friends of ALYN Hospital (AFAH), www.alynus.org
supports Israel's premiere rehabilitation center for physically
disabled children, adolescents and young adults. ALYN Hospital
combines expertise and love so that each patient and family can
meet the challenges of living with disabilities and achieve the
highest possible level of mobility and independence. ALYN
Hospital, established over 50 years ago, is one of the world's
leading specialists in the active and intensive rehabilitation
of children with a broad range of physical disabilities and is
the only facility of its kind in Israel. The Hospital currently
has 93 beds for hospitalized patients, 100 beds for day-care
treatment and specialized out patient clinics which receive over
10,000 patient visits a year.”
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, (http://www.charitynavigator.org)
America’s leading charity evaluator, AFAH has an overall rating
of three stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity
Navigator provides the following breakdown of AFAH based on
990 tax returns through fiscal year 2006:
Overall Rating ***
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 84.2%
Administrative Expenses 4.1%
Fundraising Expenses 11.5%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.13
(AFAH spends 0.13 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ***
Organizational Capacity:
Primary Revenue Growth 17.0%
Program Expenses Growth 5.2%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 1.71
(AFAH can sustain itself for 1.71 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ****
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its Executive Director, Cathy Lanyard,
was $206,615 which was 5.85% of expenses. For purposes
of comparison, compensation for Ruth Messenger, the
President of the American Jewish World Service, was
$218,625 which was 0.76% of expenses.
As of fiscal year 2008, AFAH had net assets of $5,450,214
(down from 7,176,198 in 2007) and total assets of $5,508,989
(down from $7,219,210 in 2007.) AFAH had investments of
publicly traded securities of $3,524,025 (990 Tax return –
Part X: Balance sheet line 11) and it had investments of other
securities of $0 (line 12). AFAH had cash non- interest bearing
investments of $745,598 (line 1) and savings and temporary
cash investments of $0 (line 2.) It had pledges receivable
of $0 (line 3.) AFAH had fixed assets of land, buildings and
equipment less accumulated depreciation of $0 (line 10c) and
other investments of $0 (line 13.)
According to this blog’s financial transparency rating system
of information provided by the nonprofit on its own website,
AFAH has a transparency rating of 0 stars (6 stars is the highest
Rating.) Of the following six items, AFAH did not provide any
of this information on its website:
1) The nonprofit’s Charity Navigator rating
2) A pie-chart breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
3) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
4) The nonprofit’s annual report
5) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
6) The nonprofit’s investment philosophy
DISCUSSION:
As of fiscal year 2006, AFAH was a financially
efficient nonprofit with high organizational capacity.
As of fiscal year 2008. large percentage of its assets,
64%, were in publicly traded securities; this explains
why its net assets took a hit of 24% reflecting the
meltdown on Wall Street. meltdown. Though AFAH had
no direct exposure to Madoff investments, the downturn
on Wall Street will cause its donors to reduce their
support. Its excellent working capital ratio, of 1.71 years,
will help i t limit the amount it will have to reduce its
support of the ALYN Hospital in Israel.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The recent financial turmoil, caused by the Wall Street
and Madoff scandals, has also affected the relationship
between donor and non-profit. The turmoil has caused
donors to become uncertain and more selective in giving to
non-profits. Non-profits that are transparent about their
finances will regain the lost trust of its donors sooner than
those non-profits that are not transparent about their
finances. In order to reach out to more selective donors,
AFAH should be more transparent about its finances. AFAH
should provide additional financial information on its web site.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee
MISSION:“Since 1914, the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (JDC), www.jdc.org, has given global expression to the principle that all Jews are responsible for one another. Working today in over 70 countries, JDC acts on behalf of North America's Jewish communities and others to rescue Jews in danger, provide relief to those in distress, revitalize overseas Jewish communities, and help Israel overcome the social challenges of its most vulnerable citizens. JDC also provides non-sectarian emergency relief and long-term development assistance worldwide.” (Quote from Charity Navigator)
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, (http://www.charitynavigator.org) America’s leading charity evaluator, JDC has an overall rating of four stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity Navigator provides the following breakdown of JDC based on 990 tax returns through fiscal year 2007:
Overall Rating ****
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 92.2%
Administrative Expenses 6.4%
Fundraising Expenses 1.2%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.01
(JDC spends $0.01 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ****
Organizational Capacity:
Program Revenue Growth 7.1%
Program Expenses Growth 7.2%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 1.53
(JDC can sustain itself for 1.53 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ****
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its Chief Executive Officer, Steven Schwager,
was $431,654 which was 0.17% of expenses. For purposes
of comparison, Ruth Messenger, the President of the
American Jewish World Service, was $218,625 which
was 0.76% of expenses. These are both extremely low
percentages for a nonprofit to pay its chief executive.
As of fiscal year 2007, JDC had net assets of $379,673,951
and total assets of $474,991,928. JDC had investments of
publicly traded securities of $337,787,541 (990 Tax return –
line 54a) and it had investments of other securities of $0 (line
54b). JDC had cash non- interest bearing investments of
$64,486,725 (line 45) and savings and temporary cash
investments of $11,482,486 (line 46.) It had pledges receivable
less allowance for doubtful accounts of $22,642,102 (line 48c.)
JDC had fixed assets of land, buildings and equipment less
accumulated depreciation of $24,292,621 (line 57c) and other
investments of $0 (line 56.)
According to this blog’s financial transparency rating system
of information provided by the nonprofit on its own website,
JDC has a transparency rating of 1 star (6 stars is the highest
Rating.) Of the following six items, JDC provided only its
Charity Navigator rating on its website:
1) The nonprofit’s Charity Navigator rating
2) A pie-chart breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
3) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
4) The nonprofit’s annual report
5) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
6) The nonprofit’s investment philosophy
DISCUSSION:
As of fiscal year 2007, JDC was a highly financially
efficient nonprofit with high organizational capacity.
A large percentage of its assets, 71%, were in publicly traded
securities that have since taken a 30-40% hit from the Wall Street
meltdown. Another 5% of its assets were in pledges
receivable of which JDC discounts 21% for doubtful
accounts; this optimistic expectation will not be realized.
Though JDC had no direct exposure to Madoff investments,
the downturn on Wall Street will cause its donors to reduce their
support. Its excellent working capital ratio, of 1.53 years, will
help it limit the amount it will have to reduce its support other
nonprofits.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The recent financial turmoil, caused by the Wall Street and
Madoff scandals, has also affected the relationship between donor
and non-profit. The turmoil has caused donors to become uncertain
and more selective in giving to non-profits. Non-profits that are
transparent about their finances will regain the lost trust of its
donors sooner than those non-profits that are not transparent about
their finances. In order to reach out to more selective donors,
JDC should be more transparent about its finances. JDC
should provide additional financial information on its web site.
FINANCIAL EFFICIENCY EVALUATION:
According to Charity Navigator, (http://www.charitynavigator.org) America’s leading charity evaluator, JDC has an overall rating of four stars (four stars is the highest rating.) Charity Navigator provides the following breakdown of JDC based on 990 tax returns through fiscal year 2007:
Overall Rating ****
Organizational Efficiency: Program Expenses 92.2%
Administrative Expenses 6.4%
Fundraising Expenses 1.2%
Fundraising Efficiency $0.01
(JDC spends $0.01 to raise $1.)
Efficiency Rating ****
Organizational Capacity:
Program Revenue Growth 7.1%
Program Expenses Growth 7.2%
Working Capital Ratio (years) 1.53
(JDC can sustain itself for 1.53 years
without generating new revenue.)
Capacity Rating ****
Organizational Capacity refers to an organization’s
ability to sustain itself over time. Charities that exhibit
consistent revenue and expenses growth are more likely
to sustain its programs and services over the long haul.
Compensation for its Chief Executive Officer, Steven Schwager,
was $431,654 which was 0.17% of expenses. For purposes
of comparison, Ruth Messenger, the President of the
American Jewish World Service, was $218,625 which
was 0.76% of expenses. These are both extremely low
percentages for a nonprofit to pay its chief executive.
As of fiscal year 2007, JDC had net assets of $379,673,951
and total assets of $474,991,928. JDC had investments of
publicly traded securities of $337,787,541 (990 Tax return –
line 54a) and it had investments of other securities of $0 (line
54b). JDC had cash non- interest bearing investments of
$64,486,725 (line 45) and savings and temporary cash
investments of $11,482,486 (line 46.) It had pledges receivable
less allowance for doubtful accounts of $22,642,102 (line 48c.)
JDC had fixed assets of land, buildings and equipment less
accumulated depreciation of $24,292,621 (line 57c) and other
investments of $0 (line 56.)
According to this blog’s financial transparency rating system
of information provided by the nonprofit on its own website,
JDC has a transparency rating of 1 star (6 stars is the highest
Rating.) Of the following six items, JDC provided only its
Charity Navigator rating on its website:
1) The nonprofit’s Charity Navigator rating
2) A pie-chart breakdown of the nonprofit’s expenses
3) The nonprofits most recently filed 990 tax return
4) The nonprofit’s annual report
5) The nonprofit’s audited financial statement
6) The nonprofit’s investment philosophy
DISCUSSION:
As of fiscal year 2007, JDC was a highly financially
efficient nonprofit with high organizational capacity.
A large percentage of its assets, 71%, were in publicly traded
securities that have since taken a 30-40% hit from the Wall Street
meltdown. Another 5% of its assets were in pledges
receivable of which JDC discounts 21% for doubtful
accounts; this optimistic expectation will not be realized.
Though JDC had no direct exposure to Madoff investments,
the downturn on Wall Street will cause its donors to reduce their
support. Its excellent working capital ratio, of 1.53 years, will
help it limit the amount it will have to reduce its support other
nonprofits.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The recent financial turmoil, caused by the Wall Street and
Madoff scandals, has also affected the relationship between donor
and non-profit. The turmoil has caused donors to become uncertain
and more selective in giving to non-profits. Non-profits that are
transparent about their finances will regain the lost trust of its
donors sooner than those non-profits that are not transparent about
their finances. In order to reach out to more selective donors,
JDC should be more transparent about its finances. JDC
should provide additional financial information on its web site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
