Jewish Family Service

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205928151
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Passaic, NJ, USA
Phone
973-777-7638
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Counseling
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,396,905
Expenses
$7,126,438
Assets
$5,832,203
Liabilities
$1,731,453

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LEON LICHTER (PRESIDENT)
  • ALEXANDER HERZOG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALEXANDER HERZOG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $229,370 total reported compensation
  • MICHELLE GRANT (DIRECTOR OF PSYCHIATRIC SE): $153,339 total reported compensation
  • JOEL NOAM (DIRECTOR OF QUALITY AND COMPLIANCE): $127,905 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Supports and strengthens the lives of families and individuals through affordable, high-quality mental health and social services. Prior to her current role, Sue served as a Grants Coordinator in higher education, where she managed grant strategy, budget reconciliation, and reporting while collaborating with administrators and program officers and ensuring compliance with state and federal requirements. Sue’s professional background also includes executive-level administrative and project support across multiple industries, where she developed strong organizational and communication skills in fast-paced environments. She is committed to supporting programs that strengthen individuals and families and values being part of a collaborative, mission-driven organization.

What it reported doing in 2024

Senior wellness servicesjfs senior services provide a continuum of care that allows senior citizens to age in place. Services include geriatric psychiatric evaluations, in-home/general counseling, case management and caregiver support. The sequoia wellness program is the agency's socialization day program for aging adults and includes meals, exercise, discussion groups and special workshops in the arts.peace: a learned solution (pals) and hispanic victims of domestic violence (hvdv)both pals and hvdv programs aim to deliver culturally specific therapy and case management services to survivors of domestic violence. Pals is a research-based therapeutic program model proven to reduce the effects of trauma on childrenand their non-offending caregivers; the vast majority of program participants are of latin american descent. Through both mainstream mental health intreventions and creative therapies (such as art, dance and drama), both program offers up to one year of grant-funded services to those exposed to domestic violence. Food pantry & neurodiverse vocational supportclients facing food insecurity have access to the jfs food pantry, which is stocked with household goods and kosher food products. Any client in need can access the food pantry by making a confidential appointment with the pantry manager. The pantry also provides job readiness training to neurodiverse members of the community who wish to gain skills that prepare them for entry into the workforce. Case managementcase management services help high-risk families navigate the crisis of violence, poverty, tragedy or illness by connecting them with legal, financial, housing, vocational and medical resources. Jfs case managers also assist clients in obtaining health insurance through the get covered nj marketplace. Bilingual case management services are available in hebrew, spanish, russian and yiddish.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.1%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $24.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 38th 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: 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: 3.7%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.82; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 88.1% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $6.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $229K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.