LifeBridge Health
Legal name: The Baltimore Jewish Eldercare Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 522337669
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Baltimore, MD, USA
- Phone
- 410-601-9355
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $562,230
- Expenses
- $530,531
- Assets
- $12,773,028
- Liabilities
- $248,305
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANDREW CUSHNIR (DIRECTOR AND PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- DAVID H KRAJEWSKI (BJEF ASSITANT TREASURER, LBH EVP & CFO): $1,986,680 total reported compensation
- JASON H WEINER (BJEF ASSISTANT SEC, LBH SVP & GC): $1,361,976 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Levindale is a geriatric center and hospital dedicated to providing superior service for the aging, frail and ill in institutional, community and home settings. As an advocate for the elderly, Levindale accepts a leadership role in defining and developing, in collaboration with other agencies, a comprehensive continuum of nursing, medical and social services within the Jewish community of the Baltimore metropolitan area. Programs are operated within the values inherent in Judaism pursuant to Levindale’s charter. As part of our Eden Alternative and Neighborhood Model programs, we are committed to creating an environment that promotes the celebration of life. L’chaim (To Life)!
What it reported doing in 2024
The corporation provides financial support for levindale hebrew geriatric center and hospital, inc, a section 501(c)(3) hospital, to support its charitable, educational, and scientific activities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 94.3%; rating input score 94
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5.6%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.08; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 50%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $500K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $2M · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 52 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.