Jewish Community Foundation Orange County
Legal name: Jewish Community Foundation of Orange County
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 953645825
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Irvine, CA, United States
- Phone
- 949.435.3490
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Foundations
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $23,784,203
- Expenses
- $15,863,754
- Assets
- $134,763,492
- Liabilities
- $13,669,941
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WENDY CHASE ARENSON (PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECT)
Highest reported compensation
- WENDY CHASE ARENSON (PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECT): $311,454 total reported compensation
- MEGAN LIN (MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER): $148,960 total reported compensation
- RACHAEL RIPPS (DONOR ENGAGEMENT MANAGER): $126,720 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
At the Jewish Community Foundation Orange County, we seek to guarantee a Jewish tomorrow through the creation of a culture of legacy within our Jewish community and by empowering individuals to engage in effective, meaningful giving. The Jewish Community Foundation Orange County offers individuals endowment opportunities to perpetuate support for a particular organization or area of interest. Gifts may be made during one’s lifetime or in one’s estate plan. The Foundation accepts and manages your fund with a variety of assets including, cash, stock or real property to implement your estate plan. Supporting the community through JCFOC offers significant tax benefits and, in some cases, a source of income for you for a lifetime. HOW DO WE BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY?
What it reported doing in 2025
Acquire, manage, administer, and expend funds for charitable purposes including assistance and support of other 501(c)(3) organizations' associations and undertakings.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 85% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 80
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.5%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 95.4%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 95.2%; rating input score 95; 34th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 33.3%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.5; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.2%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 80.5% of revenue deployed · 95.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $311K · 22 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 198 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 193 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.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.