Makom

Legal name: Jewish Foundation for Group Homes Endowment Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203992763
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2019
Location
North Bethesda, MD, USA
Phone
2402836000
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$459,076
Expenses
$183,720
Assets
$17,786,254
Liabilities
$14,525,723

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID ERVIN (MAKOM'S CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID ERVIN (MAKOM'S CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $341,165 total reported compensation
  • DIANE RUBINSTEIN (MAKOM'S CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $234,680 total reported compensation
  • LEWIS FONTEK (MAKOM'S CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $198,009 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We support and empower people with intellectual and developmental disabilities to achieve the quality of life to which they aspire. Our Values. Most importantly, it means the individuals we support have a stronger voice and receive services that are continuously improving to help them live the lives they choose. Makom systems that drive us toward CQL Accreditation have been reimagined or created outright to strengthen accountability and improve systems of measuring quality and how those systems are resourced and supported. While we are in the early stages of implementation, the accreditation framework provides clear expectations that support continuous improvement and reinforce alignment between our practices, mission, and values—our BA and POM Plans are operational roadmaps. The accreditation framework continues to center the peopl.

What it reported doing in 2024

Investment: following the investment policy of jfgh endowment, inc. Maintain an investment portfolio to generate earnings sufficient to support an annual spending policy to benefit jewish foundation for group homes, inc (d.b.a. Makom).

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 80th 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: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 60%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 96.81; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.82; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 74.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $152K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $341K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.