Jewish for Good
Legal name: Durham-chapel Hill Jewish Federation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 581384316
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Durham, NC, USA
- Phone
- 9193544936
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $9,992,482
- Expenses
- $9,907,136
- Assets
- $27,203,258
- Liabilities
- $7,344,802
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
26 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ARI MEDOFF (PRESIDENT)
- ELIZABETH SINGER (VICE PRESIDENT)
- BRYNA RAPP (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
- ELLEN PIZER (PRESIDENT ELECT)
- JILL MADSEN (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JILL MADSEN (CEO): $209,486 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We provide engaging opportunities that deepen jewish connections, knowledge and relations to israel; services for helping those in need; programs that foster healthy living; and pathways for chartiable giving.
What it reported doing in 2024
Our helping department offers a comprehensive range of services that help people meet life's challenges. Guided by the jewish values of communal responsibility and social justice, we are passionate about our commitment to serving all members of the community, regardless of race, religious affiliation, identity, age, or ability. We deliver high-quality professional social services for adults and families through all stages of life. We strive to improve the quality of life by providing affordable services and educational workshops that help foster the jewish tradition of empowering people to care for themselves and each other.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 67
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.1%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 90.5%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 47.6%; rating input score 48; 15th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.75; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.1%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 92.1% of revenue deployed · 90.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $209K · 26 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 11 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.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 48/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.