J Street Education Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202777557
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025965207
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Interfaith Coalitions
Affiliation
Interfaith

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,912,776
Expenses
$9,399,840
Assets
$5,165,600
Liabilities
$941,980

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEREMY BEN-AMI (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • PETER FREY (CHAIR)
  • KENNETH BOB (TREASURER)
  • NANCY BERNSTEIN (DIRECTOR)

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

To provide education with respect to the need for bold american leadership to help achieve a peaceful, viable and just resolution to the israeli-palestinian conflict.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided education with respect to the need for bold american leadership to reach a peaceful, viable and just resolution to the israeli-palestinian conflict by organizing within the local communities, mobilizing rabbinic leaders, empowering students on university campuses, and planning educational trips for members of congress to the region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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

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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.5%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 59%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.2%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.5% of revenue deployed · 59% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $120K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.