Los Angeles Jewish Health

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953510024
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Reseda, CA, USA
Phone
855.227.3745
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Nonprofit Management
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$189,562,555
Expenses
$105,469,164
Assets
$104,316,354
Liabilities
$106,677,943

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

Leadership & pay

36 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DALE SUROWITZ (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • DALE SUROWITZ (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $940,392 total reported compensation
  • NOACHIM MARCO (CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER): $595,740 total reported compensation
  • LARISSA STEPANIANS (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $491,779 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Nursing, residential and clinical care for the elderly. Los Angeles Jewish Health has grown from a group of caring neighbors providing shelter to a leading nonprofit senior care organization. Los Angeles Jewish Health is committed to providing a broad spectrum of best-in-class senior healthcare services while staying true to our mission of delivering excellence in senior care for all, rooted in Jewish values. With more than 100 years of trusted care for seniors, we have evolved to meet the ever-changing needs of each individual. As the largest single-source senior housing provider in Los Angeles, our San Fernando Valley campuses are home to more than 1,000 women and men. We serve more than 4,000 seniors through our comprehensive healthcare progra.

What it reported doing in 2024

Funding organization and management services for related organizations: eisenberg village of the los angeles jewish home for the aging, grancell village of the los angeles jewish home for the aging, jha geriatric services, annenberg school of nursing. In addition it includes the development and operations of an independent living facility that provides memory care services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

STRONG - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 95
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.8%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 74.6%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: 44.4%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.99; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.02; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 73.8% of revenue deployed · 74.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $78.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $940K · 36 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.4M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.