Fight Hate

Legal name: Fight Hate Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
990537185
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Englewood, NJ, United States
Phone
8445094888
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Judaism
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$215,417
Expenses
$235,585
Assets
$22,721
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL COHEN (Executive Dir.): $29,615 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Fight Hate protects Jewish students on college campuses and builds the next generation of leaders to fight hate through a three-part strategy: Leadership, Advocacy, and Protection. Our Mission To protect Jewish students on college campuses and build the next generation of leaders to fight hate. We achieve this through a proven three-part strategy:. Fight Hate delivers crisis-response and safety training, media and legal rights guidance, and strategies that help students anticipate risks and respond decisively to antisemitic incidents. Advocate Fight Hate partners with diverse student communities as well as campus administrators to strengthen policies, build coalitions, and drive systemic change that makes campuses safer and more accountable.

What it reported doing in 2025

Fight Hate operated a campus leadership program to protect Jewish students on college campuses by recruiting, training, and supporting student leaders to address antisemitism and promote inclusive campus environments. Through leadership development, advocacy training, and direct support, the organization provided students with resources and mentorship to engage campus administrations, respond to hostile incidents, and collaborate with diverse student groups to improve campus safety and inclusion.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 86%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $30.57 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.4%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.6%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 27.7% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -61.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 94% of revenue deployed · 86% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 8 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $203K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $30K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.