National Center for Jewish Film

Legal name: National Center for Jewish Filminc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042764044
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Waltham, MA, USA
Phone
(781) 736 8600
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Film, Video
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$263,296
Expenses
$289,515
Assets
$370,185
Liabilities
$120,320

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA RIVO (CO DIRECTOR): $95,000 total reported compensation
  • SHARON PUCKER RIVO (CO DIRECTOR): $5,200 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The National Center for Jewish Film is a unique, independent nonprofit motion picture archive, distributor, resource center and exhibitor. Its ongoing mission is the collection, preservation and exhibition of films with artistic and educational value relevant to the Jewish experience and the dissemination of these materials to the widest possible audience.

What it reported doing in 2024

The center provided several educational institutions and the general public with films related to the jewish experience through their distribution programs. In the scope of its collections and the range of its activities, ncjf is the only organization of its kind. As the largest and oldest resource center for programming jewish content film materials, ncjf is the world's premiere resource for and about jewish film. Each year, ncjf provides programming consultation and research assistance to 7,000 filmmakers, artists, educators, curators and organizations. The center helped launch the now de rigueur programming of jewish film festivals and is responsible, in part, for the development of jewish and ethnic the center sponsored various filmakers producing films related to jewish history, culture, and the judaic experience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 61
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 73.9%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 20th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.28; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.6%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 83.1% of revenue deployed · 73.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $214K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $95K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.