Camp Solomon Schechter
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 930572590
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Seattle, WA, USA
- Phone
- Summer: (360) 352-1019; Winter: (206) 447-1967
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Camps
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,492,549
- Expenses
- $5,592,161
- Assets
- $11,663,645
- Liabilities
- $1,454,436
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jonathan Schwartz (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Zachary Duitch (Executive Dir.): $228,408 total reported compensation
- Jefry Nobbe (COO): $132,854 total reported compensation
- Amanda Graizel (Camp Director): $120,692 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Camp Solomon Schechter has a 70+ year tradition of fun, friendship, and Jewish education in the PNW. We create our ideal Jewish community through summer and year-round programming dedicated to improving campers’ social skills, helping them deepen their Jewish identities, and discovering new talents and abilities. CSS adheres to the values of integrity, _derech eretz_ (respect), and _tikkun olam_ (repairing the world) to build a place where Judaism and Joy are One. Our Philosophy We value each child as an individual, and strive to support their social and spiritual growth in a welcoming environment.
What it reported doing in 2024
To provide a Jewish overnight camping experience for children in accordance with our mission statement.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 69% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 88.2%; rating input score 88
- Program expense ratio: 86.5%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1.8%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.09; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 88.2% of revenue deployed · 86.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $228K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.