Jewish Family Service of Central New Jersey
Legal name: Jewish Family Service Agency of Central Nj
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 221487364
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Elizabeth, NJ, USA
- Phone
- 908.352.8375
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $10,568,507
- Expenses
- $9,854,293
- Assets
- $5,746,051
- Liabilities
- $1,911,998
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
60 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- THOMAS BECK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- RUTH MARGOLIN (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
- ARIELLE TRAUB (VICE PRESIDENT)
- JENNIFER SOFIELD (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- THOMAS BECK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $221,589 total reported compensation
- MARIA MULLEN (DIRECTOR OF NURSING): $163,808 total reported compensation
- Susannah Berk (Director of Finance & Admin): $162,221 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of Jewish Family Service Agency of Central New Jersey is to serve the community at large on a non-sectarian basis as an expression of Jewish communal values and the Jewish principle of Tikkun Olam (“Repair the World”). The Agency aims to foster the development of healthy individual and family life by offering a range of services supporting mental, emotional, and physical health for all ages.
What it reported doing in 2024
Homecare services for the elderly- we provide in-home services to the elderly of union county. Services can include homemaker service, certified home health aide service, personal care transportation service.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.6%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 6.8%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.2%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 81.6% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 54 of 54 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $8.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $222K · 60 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
- Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.