Jewish Family Service of Western Massachusetts
Legal name: Jewish Family Service of Wmass
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 042104352
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Springfield, MA, USA
- Phone
- 413-737-2601
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Family Services
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $10,508,734
- Expenses
- $10,363,022
- Assets
- $2,938,411
- Liabilities
- $1,266,046
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAMESON GREENE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- JAMESON GREENE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $176,419 total reported compensation
- CHRISTINE LORENZ (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $174,112 total reported compensation
- SARA BEDFORD (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $122,296 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Jewish Family Service of Western Massachusetts provides exceptional social services—rooted in Jewish values—to support individuals and families from diverse cultural and economic backgrounds. Rooted in Jewish values, we provide exceptional social services to support individuals and families from diverse cultural and economic backgrounds. Our Mission. Jewish Family Service of Western Massachusetts serves as a community leader, partnering with people to achieve fulfilling lives. Our programs strengthen our community by strengthening the individual–from resettling refugee families, to supporting New Americans to become self-sufficient, counseling young adults through life’s transitions, equipping older adults to age well, protecting elders...
What it reported doing in 2024
New american program - our program resettles refugees regardless of race andreligion. The program provides case management, employment services, english as a second language, assistance with applying for citizenshipand advocacy. In addition, we offers educational trainings aboutlocal and national refugee programs and on cultural competency.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 75% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 89.4%; rating input score 89
- Program expense ratio: 90.7%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $136.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st 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: 89.4% of revenue deployed · 90.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $9.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $176K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $283K reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.