The Jerusalem Fund for Education and Community Development

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521238142
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2023381958
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,523,140
Expenses
$1,423,871
Assets
$10,029,291
Liabilities
$1,008,108

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FADI KAFEETY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • FADI KAFEETY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $42,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The jerusalem fund provides education and cultural programming in order to promote awareness about palestinian and arab-israeli affairs. While its events have a local reach, its publications and information resources have a national circulation. It also sponsors a humanitarian and civil society assistance program for palestinians, as well as several diabetes clinics in palestine. It is a not-for-profit organization incorporated under the laws of the district of columbia.

What it reported doing in 2025

The palestine center, the educational program of the jerusalem fund, focuses on the implications of specific u.s. Policies with regard to palestine, providing a much-needed palestinian/arab-american perspective to the political, academic and media establishments of Washington, d.c. And the arab world. It gives voice to the palestinian narrative through policy briefings, lecture series, conferences, symposia, scholarly research publications and an extensive research library. Since its founding, it has held more than 1,000 events. It has been featured on c-span, al-jazeera english, cnn and numerous other media outlets. Its annual internship program, nearly two decades long, has more than one hundred alumni.

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 95% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.3%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 79.1%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 33rd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.5%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.04; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.3% of revenue deployed · 79.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $42K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.