Jcam

Legal name: The Jewish Cemetery Association of Massachusetts

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222543200
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Needham, MA, USA
Phone
617-244-6509
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,415,245
Expenses
$4,723,436
Assets
$27,376,671
Liabilities
$1,933,915

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTT JOSEPH (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • STEVEN HAMBURGER (DIRECTOR)
  • SCOTT JOSEPH (PRESIDENT)
  • JAY SAGE (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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

JCAM functions as a burial society for the Jewish communities of Massachusetts, while honoring the dead in accordance with Jewish religious practices, traditions and beliefs. JCAM is committed to the maintenance and security of the existing and abandoned cemeteries under its care and provides continuity of their operation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Maintain cemeteries - since 1984, jcam has taken ownership for 115 abandoned and active jewish cemeteries, as well as managing nine independent jewish cemeteries. Jcam performs regular and seasonal maintenance for the cemeteries and grave sites as prescribed by jewish laws and customs. In addition, jcam pays attention to the security of these visible, vulnerable, and often remote, jewish sites. In so doing, the memories of the community's children, parents, grandparents and more distant ancestors are preserved for future generations of jewish families and historians.

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 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.4%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 84%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36.3%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.8; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 68.4% of revenue deployed · 84% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.8M reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 5 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.