Jewish Federation of Palm Beach County Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
590948696
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
West Palm Beach, FL, USA
Phone
5614780700
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Federated Giving Programs
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$54,678,950
Expenses
$43,650,276
Assets
$220,695,327
Liabilities
$39,452,620

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

Leadership & pay

70 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL HOFFMAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • MATTHEW KERNKRAUT (EXCECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOSEPHINE GON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PALM BEACH CENTER)
  • RACHEL BERG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MJCF)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL HOFFMAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $512,525 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW KERNKRAUT (EXCECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $402,008 total reported compensation
  • LEAH HOLCZER (CHIEF FINANCIAL AND OPERATING OFFICER (AS OF 07/24)): $270,196 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 jewish federation of palm beach county is the community-building organization of the jewish community. Our mission is to strengthen jewish identity, energize the relationship with israel and meeting human needs that are uniquely the obligation of the jewish community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community program center - the jewish federation of palm beach has house programs servicing the palm beach jewish communities most pressing needs. Programming includes: (1) palm beach center to combat antisemitism and hatred and the jewish community relations council, which promises a secure jewish community, locally and overseas; combats antisemitism, discrimination, and bigotry; and champions a just and pluralistic society, (2) mandel center for leadership development, which develops strong communities through investing in people (professionals and lay leadership), and (3) career connections and resources, which assists local residents with career counseling and job-seeking support.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 64% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 99
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.9%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.2%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 98.3%; rating input score 98; 54th 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: 20.2%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.06; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.9% of revenue deployed · 79.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 57 of 58 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $34.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $513K · 70 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.4M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 77 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 68 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.