Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles

Legal name: Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371858193
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, United States
Phone
323.761.8700
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$22,586,600
Expenses
$24,402,149
Assets
$59,193,884
Liabilities
$2,963,856

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

Leadership & pay

96 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AARON BARG (Vice President/Director)
  • ADAM GREITZER (Vice President/Director)
  • ADAM MATYE (Vice President/Director)
  • ALAN LEVEY (Vice President/Director)
  • Alan Sinder (Vice President/Director (BEG 9/24))
  • AMY ZIERING (Vice President/Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • AARON LERNER (Director): $664,762 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL M ROTHBLATT (Director (BEG 8/24)): $447,607 total reported compensation
  • DEBORAH JOHNSTON (Treasurer): $369,842 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Trusted Guidance. Meaningful Impact. For more than 70 years, the Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles has been a trusted partner to individuals and families seeking to give with purpose and impact. We combine deep community knowledge with personalized philanthropic counsel to help you navigate your giving with clarity, confidence, and intention. We understand that every philanthropic journey is unique. Whether you are just getting started, refining your strategy, or planning for the future, we work alongside you to align your giving with your values and goals—maximizing both individual and collective impact. JCF logo.

What it reported doing in 2024

Charitable giving

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 61
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 1st 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.6%; rating input score 99; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.8%; rating input score 95; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.43; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.6% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 127 of 134 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $24.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $665K · 96 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 25 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 85 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 101 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.