Dallas Jewish Historical Society
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 752156817
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jun 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
- Location
- Dallas, TX, United States
- Phone
- 214-239-7120
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Historical Societies & Historic Preservation
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $302,841
- Expenses
- $447,458
- Assets
- $484,810
- Liabilities
- $148
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jeanette Pincus (President)
- Stuart Rosenfield (Immediate Past President)
People named in this filing
- Jeanette Pincus (President)
- Rhonda Duchin (1st VP)
- Lauri Prengler (2nd VP)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Connecting present and future generations with Jewish Dallas. Watching the demolition of Temple Emanu-El’s early South Dallas building, a concerned group of onlookers, including Ginger Chesnick Jacobs and Ruth Brown Kahn, became acutely aware of the importance of saving local Jewish history. That moment triggered the inspiration for the establishment of the Dallas Jewish Archives, a committee of the Jewish Community Center (JCC), in 1970, which evolved into the Dallas Jewish Historical Society (DJHS), dedicated to education on and preservation of Dallas Jewish history. With its mission of “preserving the precious past as a living legacy for our community,” the agency is the only one that collects, preserves, and records the history of the entire Greate.
What it reported doing in 2024
Educate the general public on contributions made by past generations of Jewish immigrants to Dallas as well as those contributions made by current Jewish residents of Dallas.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - 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: 38
- Transparency & Controls: 93
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 30
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 45.7%; rating input score 46
- Program expense ratio: 26.2%; rating input score 26
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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: 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: -47.8%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.08; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 35.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 45.7% of revenue deployed · 26.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $117K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- 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 46/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 26/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.