Urban Adamah

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274349643
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Phone
5106491595
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,369,725
Expenses
$3,222,290
Assets
$16,954,674
Liabilities
$792,289

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Adam Weisberg (Executive Dir.): $186,438 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Urban Adamah (the Organization) is a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, founded in 2010. Urban Adamah is an educational farm and community center in Berkeley, California, that inte grates the practices of Jewish tradition, sustainable agriculture, mindfulness and social action to build loving, just, and sustainable communities. They provide educational programs and community celebrations for more than 5,000 visitors per year, as well as a residential fellowship program for young adults that combines organic farming, progressive Jewish living and community internships. Urban Adamah also offers innovative, farm-based programs for school-age children. Their organic farm produces a diverse yield of crops, all of which they donate to the local community through food banks and their weekly Free Farm Stand.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Education Center. Jewish Farming Summer Camp provides an innovative day camp for children ages 5-12 for seven weeks including an interfaith camp week and a spring break/pre-Passover camp week. Hebrew School on the Farm: in partnership with the Kehillah Community Synagogue in Piedmont and Congregation Beth El in Berkeley, the organization offers an afterschool Hebrew School program that integrates hands-on farm activities, food growing and preparation and arts and music with Jewish tradition.

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 - 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.1%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 72.5%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 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: 4.4%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.26; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.1% of revenue deployed · 72.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 16 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 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 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.