Elayne and James Schoke Jewish Family Service of Fairfield County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061130830
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Stamford, CT, US
Phone
203-921-4161 (Stamford Office); 203-628-4508 (Fairfield Office)
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,183,355
Expenses
$2,575,728
Assets
$8,491,409
Liabilities
$1,657,415

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

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATT GREENBERG (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATT GREENBERG (PRESIDENT & CEO): $291,724 total reported compensation
  • LEAH A SCHECHTER (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER (UNTIL 10/24)): $138,392 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Sustains families and individuals through life’s challenges and builds strong, healthy communities; serving Stamford, Westport, Bridgeport and Upper Fairfield County (CT). Since 1975, the Elayne and James Schoke Jewish Family Service of Fairfield County has been all about families and community. Our mission is to sustain families and individuals through all of life’s challenges and build strong, healthy communities. An ever-changing, ever-evolving social service agency, Schoke JFS is a presence in the community that continuously responds to challenges with the highest degree of professionalism, so that those who need us the most can benefit from our services. We are constantly adding new programs and services to meet the increasing demands of today’s world. Our seasoned, caring and compassionate staff provides creative, individualized attention to all our clie.

What it reported doing in 2024

Elderly services - provides assistance that enables seniors to remain safe, healthy and independent to the fullest extent possible. Services for the elderly include the home companion program, case management, geriatric counseling and volunteer services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.5%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 79.1%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 62.9%; rating input score 63; 17th 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: 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: -18%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.3; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 94.5% of revenue deployed · 79.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $292K · 30 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.