Oregon Area Jewish Committee

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261871211
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
5032956761
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Judaism
Affiliation
Judaism

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,388
Expenses
$10,484
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEFF REINGOLD (President)

People named in this filing

  • MISHA ISAAK (Director)
  • SELMA DUCKLER (Director)
  • HELEN SPECTOR (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Oregon Area Jewish Committee is the leading Jewish communal voice in Oregon and Southwest Washington. Through Jewish values, we advance social justice, human rights, religious liberty, support for Israel, mutual understanding, and democratic principles. OAJC aspires to be the area's Jewish ambassador to the community at large.

What it reported doing in 2014

Yom hashoah sponsorhsip for 2015. "unto every person there is a name", a full day, public program that brings in participants from all sectors of our community to learn about the holocaust and to remember and honor the victims.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 33
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 3
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.3%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 14

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -209.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -26.1% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -24.2% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -38.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.3% of revenue deployed · 14.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • 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.

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: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.