Just One Chesed
Legal name: Just One Chesed Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 475615860
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2017
- Location
- Chicago, IL, USA
- Phone
- 7737501670
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Voluntarism Promotion
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,037,658
- Expenses
- $1,072,425
- Assets
- $1,529,752
- Liabilities
- $15,706
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JERRY LATINIK (President)
Highest reported compensation
- JERRY LATINIK (President): $85,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
JustOneChesed facilitates and spreads acts of Kindness, empowering people to give back and support others, while creating a lasting impact—changing the world JustOneChesed at a time. JustOneChesed (JOC) facilitates and spreads acts of Kindness. Empowering people to give back and support others, while creating a lasting impact – changing the world JustOneChesed at a time. Our Mission. Following that experience, Jerry was motivated to create a central hub connecting those in need with those who want to help – even if all they had to give was a single act of chesed. Working off the simple but profound concept that one act of kindness can change the world, Just One Chesed was officially born in 2016 as a one-stop-shop for all things chesed. Since then, it has grown to serve individuals, families, communities, schools, and organizations who want to do their part in making the world a...
What it reported doing in 2025
Moneys raised to help equip soldiers with necessary equipment and also to feed the soldiers in combat.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 98
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 55
- Sustainability: 38
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: $70.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 73.3%; rating input score 73; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3.4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.43; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 34.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 29.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 43% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $85K · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 22 of 26 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Series program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.