JEWISHcolorado

Legal name: Allied Jewish Federation of Colorado

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
840402662
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2013
Official website data refreshed
Jun 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3033213399
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,236,345
Expenses
$1,698,868
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

40 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUG SESERMAN (PRESIDENT & CEO)

People named in this filing

  • JUDY ALTENBERG (AT LARGE TRUSTEE)
  • RICK ALTMAN (COMMUNITY CAMPAIGN CHAIR)
  • RABBI BRUCE DOLLIN (ROCKY MOUNTAIN RABBINICAL COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We convene, connect, invest, and protect Jewish life in Colorado, Israel, and around the world. Learn More. Our Mission We convene, connect, invest, and protect Jewish life in Colorado, Israel, and around the world. Joyce Zeff Israel Study Tour (IST) Mission & Overseas Travel Ramat HaNegev Partnership.

What it reported doing in 2013

Community planning and outreach activities: the allied jewishfederation of Colorado convenes community organizations toleverage and streamline service delivery to the community.federation plans for current local operational needs and nearfuture capital needs. We educate the community about advocacy forjudaism and israel. We serve as the unifying agency for programsthat engage and connect jews to their jewish community. Ourannual campaign funds programs such as jewishcolorado.orgcommunity website, online community calendar, "what's happening injewish Colorado" monthly e-newsletter, the jewish communityrelations council (jcrc), early childhood education scholarshipfund and others.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 62% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.5%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 71.7%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 91.5%; rating input score 91; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -37.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -23.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -27.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 10 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 98.5% of revenue deployed · 71.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 36 of 36 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 40 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 32 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.