International Association of Jewish Free Loans

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521590650
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Phone
6027147763
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Charity, Voluntarism Promotion
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$71,699
Expenses
$68,587
Assets
$151,313

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TIM GROSSMAN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TIM GROSSMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • TINA SHEINBEIN (COORDINATOR)
  • SELWYN ISAKOW (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of this organization shall be to provide for the exchange of ideas, procedures and other information as will assist each member organization in furthering the charitable purpose of providing financial assistance through interest free lending.

What it reported doing in 2025

Annual membership meeting to educate members and raise awareness on best lending and fundraising practices for non-profit lending agencies.

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 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.7%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 47.8%; rating input score 48

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.3%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.21; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.7% of revenue deployed · 47.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $33K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.