Springfield Jewish Community Center
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 042103802
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Springfield, MA, United States
- Phone
- (413) 739-4715
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Recreational Centers
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,428,484
- Expenses
- $7,218,081
- Assets
- $19,323,287
- Liabilities
- $2,040,168
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RACHEL BEREZIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
- DREW SADOWSKY (PRESIDENT)
- KAREN JARMOC (CEO - BEG 9-2024)
- SAMANTHA DUBRINSKY (CEO END 9-2024)
Highest reported compensation
- SAMANTHA DUBRINSKY (CEO END 9-2024): $164,206 total reported compensation
- YISROEL GESIN (CFO - END 9-2025): $145,567 total reported compensation
- DEBBIE KRIVOY (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $138,606 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 Springfield JCC enriches community and nurtures wellness through physical, intellectual, social, and spiritual programs and services. The JCC is guided by Jewish values, welcoming people of all abilities, ages, backgrounds, identities and faiths. Modeling a dependable, predictable, ethical, and safe behavior that will demonstrate to community members and staff alike that they can rely on the J, as well as each other. Our Mission The Springfield Jewish Community Center enriches community and nurtures wellness through physical, intellectual, social, and spiritual programs and services.
What it reported doing in 2024
Nursery & elementary school, children at play & day camp - childhood development programs geared to educational and social needs of children
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 61% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 59
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59.5%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 67.8%; rating input score 68
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 14.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.68; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 59.5% of revenue deployed · 67.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $164K · 21 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $2.8M reported
- Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.