Jewish Community Day School of Rhode Island

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453007322
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Providence, RI, United States
Phone
401.751.2470
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Primary, Elementary Schools
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,163,920
Expenses
$2,580,652
Assets
$2,819,948
Liabilities
$1,121,997

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LESLEY BOGAD (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREA K KATZMAN (HEAD OF SCHOOL): $144,292 total reported compensation
  • HARSHITA LAKHIANI (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $104,163 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

JCDSRI: Empowering our children today to design tomorrow’s world. The Jewish Community Day School of Rhode Island prepares confident, collaborative, critical thinkers for the twenty-first century. At JCDSRI, **academic excellence and joyful learning go hand in hand**. Our program reflects the best practices in education – integrating rigorous academics, inquiry-based learning, and individualized support within a nurturing, inclusive, values-driven environment. The integration of general and Jewish studies, along with the study of Hebrew language, deepens students’ cognitive flexibility, critical thinking, and cultural understandings. Our educators – extraordinary educators who combine deep expertise with remarkable longevity at our school – continually innovate to meet each learner’s needs. Reports from the schools our alumni attend consistently affirm that **JCDSRI students excel acr.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education that incorporates core knowledge in both general and judaic studies for children frompre-kindergarten through fifth grade.

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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 62.7%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: 18.4%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 51% of revenue deployed · 62.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 21 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.