Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle

Legal name: David & Cathy Habib Foundation C/o Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912091080
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2022
Official website data refreshed
Jun 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
4254435400
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$504,483
Expenses
$1,552,503
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID HABIB (PRESIDENT, DIRECTOR)
  • CATHY HABIB (VICE-PRESIDENT, DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NANCY B GREER (TREASURER, DIRECTOR): $305,942 total reported compensation
  • JEAN CALLAHAN (DIRECTOR): $122,232 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Federation leads a strong Jewish Puget Sound by serving as a community voice, strengthening connections to Israel and World Jewry, and making investments in Jewish life, for today and the next generation. Founded in 1928, the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle has always been a pillar of strength, connection, and support for our local Jewish community and Jews around the world. From rescuing Holocaust survivors in the 1940s to welcoming Ethiopian and Russian immigrants in the 1980s and 1990s, and launching major relief efforts like the 2022 Ukraine Challenge, our story has always been about meeting the moment with heart, resilience, and collective action. That mission continues today with renewed urgency. Since the devastating attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, the Federation has stepped up in powerful new ways—raising over $1.6 million in emergency aid, standing with...

What it reported doing in 2022

Promoting the charitable causes of the jewish federation of greater seattle and other charitable and educational organizations as identified by the foundation's board of trustees.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 51
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.6%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd 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: 95.3%; rating input score 95; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -207.7%; rating input score 0; 0th 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: 4.4%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -13.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $306K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 38 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 39 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.