The Center for Jewish Campus Life Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770492512
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jun 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Stanford, CA, USA
Phone
6507323002
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Support N.E.C.
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,109,268
Expenses
$2,543,211
Assets
$7,240,697
Liabilities
$118,469

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JESSICA KIRSCHNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • KATHY REBACK (PRESIDENT)
  • STUART KLEIN (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JESSICA KIRSCHNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $204,585 total reported compensation
  • LEAH D NEWMAN (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $124,041 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Hillel at stanford provides a welcoming jewish home on campus for all students, as well as a bridge to the broader stanford community, fulfilling a wide range of students' religious, cultural, social, and emotional needs, and providing formative experiences to inspire connection and empower leadership in the jewish community and israel - while at stanford and in the future.

What it reported doing in 2024

General programs - as long as there is a stanford university, it should have a vibrant campus jewish community. For more than 50 years, hillel at stanford has fulfilled that promise. Now more than ever, the unique jewish community at stanford is serving as a laboratory for jewish life and leadership. Our three priorities are: inspire: we inspire the next generation of engaged jewish leaders by being both a jewish home for every student on campus and a center for innovative exploration of 21st-century judaism. Connect: we aim to reach every student possible by delivering our programs throughout the campus and ensuring that our physical space provides a welcoming home for students. Build: we seek to secure our financial viability now and building for future generations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.8%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 51.7%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

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; 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -20.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.85; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.9%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 63.8% of revenue deployed · 51.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $205K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.