Jewish Student Connection

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611420053
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2013
Official website data refreshed
Jun 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
White Plains, NY, USA
Phone
9144815505
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Judaism
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,251,161
Expenses
$1,192,939
Assets
$905,230
Liabilities
$238,566

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Susan Holzman Wachsstock (Executive Director)
  • Brad Sugar (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Susan Holzman Wachsstock (Executive Director): $165,427 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Jewish Student Connection is dedicated to establishing non-denominational Jewish clubs in public and secular private high schools, providing teens with the opportunity to explore what "Jewish" means to them personally, and aiming to help teens foster proud connections with Jewish culture, with the Jewish people, with Israel, and with each other.

What it reported doing in 2013

The primary activity of the Jewish Student Connection (JSC) is facilitating Jewish culture clubs during non-instructional time in public and private high schools. The meetings empower student leaders to discuss and debate all aspects of Jewish life and the State of Israel. JSC also provides these students with professional mentors who seek to empower students on their Jewish journeys.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.8%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 67.9%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 25.6% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.8% of revenue deployed · 67.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $810K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $165K · 11 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $923K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.