Jews United for Justice Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522346578
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027885068
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Judaism
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,655,609
Expenses
$4,012,443
Assets
$2,320,099
Liabilities
$792,523

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DESMOND SERRETTE (PRESIDENT)
  • JACOB FEINSPAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JACOB FEINSPAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $164,298 total reported compensation
  • JILL RABBINO (SR. DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT): $138,632 total reported compensation
  • WHITNEY PORTER MCARTHUR (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $124,757 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Jews united for justice advances economic, racial, and social justice in the baltimore-Washington region by educating and mobilizing our local jewish communities to action.

What it reported doing in 2024

Leadership development: to advance community organizing campaigns for social change, jufj invests deeply in its leaders to develop knowledgeable and passionate activists who can move campaigns forward with jufj and its allies, partners, and coalitions. This includes programs such as:-tzedek organizing training (tot): a four-week training series that teaches the fundamental skills of community organizing and the history of jewish organizing.-think jewishly, act locally: a three-part training series in dc, coordinated with jewish organizations, which focuses on local activism, how the dc budget can reflect our morals and values, and how to make change right here where we live.-what's at stake: educational events about the importance of participating in local elections in each of our local jurisdictions, and how they impact the issues that we work on. These are 501(c)(3) compliant events about the importance of local elections in general, not endorsing any specific candidate.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.7%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 72.7%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 63rd 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: -9.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.7% of revenue deployed · 72.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $164K · 16 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.