Michigan Jewish Sports Foundation
Legal name: The Michigan Jewish Sports Hall of Fame Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 382600231
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Bloomfield Hills, MI, United States
- Phone
- 2487528448
- Rating
- 64
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Science and Technology Museums
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $131,787
- Expenses
- $115,761
- Assets
- $494,542
- Liabilities
- $120
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
29 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STUART RAIDER (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- ADAM BREMAN (DIRECTOR)
- STEVE BERNSTEIN (VICE PRESIDE)
- BILLY BERRIS (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
The Hank Greenberg Memorial Golf and Tennis Invitational, with the unfailing support of Hank’s son, Steve Greenberg, has brought an incomparable succession of baseball all-stars to metro Detroit to play golf and mingle with their fans. Hall-of-Famers such as Sandy Koufax, Cal Ripken, Jr., Joe Garagiola, Tommy Lasorda, Ernie Banks, Dave Winfield, Brooks Robinson and too many more to mention. Then when good friend Dick Schaap passed away, an award was added to honor a member of the media who exemplifies the characteristics that so distinguished Dick’s career. Jeremy Schaap has taken his father’s place, hosting winners of this award, who include James Brown, Bob Ryan, and Roy Firestone, to name.
What it reported doing in 2025
Raised and administered funds to support other 501(c)(3) organizations which provide support for jewish community, cancer research and skill building for at-risk children. Refer to contributions made to these organizations on sch i.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 73% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.
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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 51
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 64
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 55.6%; rating input score 56
- Program expense ratio: 57.3%; rating input score 57
- Fundraising efficiency: $0.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 95%; rating input score 95; 57th 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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.2%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.27; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 55.6% of revenue deployed · 57.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 29 of 29 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $66K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 29 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.