Jewish Interactive Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461331618
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-PF 2017
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
8666018000
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Judaism
Affiliation
Judaism

Reported finances

Revenue
$134,843
Expenses
$134,240
Assets
$35,130
Liabilities
$163,079

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSHUA SALTER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

People named in this filing

  • DAVID BLOOM (CHAIRMAN (FORMER))
  • ANDREW BLOOM (TREASURER)
  • MARTIN GLATT (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To support and encourage dynamic jewish learning in children by providing them with interactive multimedia educational programs and materials on jewish subjects through the creation, development, and/or distribution of such programs and materials, and through training teachers and schools.

What it reported doing in 2024

Developed jigzi platform and content intending to bring jewisheducation up to date through a netflix like experience of jewish and hebrew content and the ability for users to create their own content. Helping teachers and parents make judaism more accessible and relevant to their children. The platform has over 15,000 games and is used by over 10,000 teachers & parents and 25,000 children every month. The platform has helped children with learning difficulties access jewish content and is being used across a diverse and inclusive community as it is personalised and relevant to specific needs. The platform is helping partner organizations digitize their content for free and make it more accessible to wider audiences.

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 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 53
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.4%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 4.64; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.4% of revenue deployed · 78.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $106K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.