Charity Navigator Logo
    Charity Navigator Logo

    Error attempting donation

    You're too fast!

    Your donation attempt encountered a problem. Please refresh the page to try again.

    You're faster than our page! Give the page a little longer to finish loading and try your donation again.

    Goodman Jewish Family Service of Broward County
    Impact & Measurement
    Accountability & Finance
    Culture & Community
    Leadership & Adaptability

    Goodman Jewish Family Service of Broward County

    Favorite
    Profile managed by nonprofit | Is this your nonprofit?
    501(c)(3) organization
    Donations are tax-deductible
    5890 South Pine Island Road
    Suite 201Davie FL 33328

    Davie FL | IRS ruling year: 1969 | EIN: 59-0995106  
    An EIN is a unique nine-digit number that identifies a business for tax purposes.
    An EIN is a unique nine-digit number that identifies a business for tax purposes.
     
    Organization Mission
    Goodman JFS is dedicated to empowering individuals, strengthening families and protecting the vulnerable by providing exceptional social services to the entire commu ... (More)
     

    Rating Information

    rating
    Great

    This charity's score is 99%, earning it a Four-Star rating. If this organization aligns with your passions and values, you can give with confidence.

    This overall score is calculated from multiple beacon scores, weighted as follows: 85% Impact & Measurement, 10% Leadership & Adaptability, 5% Culture & Community. Learn more about our criteria and methodology.

    Historical Ratings
    Charity Navigator's ratings previously did not consider Leadership & Adaptability, Culture & Community, or Impact & Measurement. The historic rating mainly reflects a version of today’s Accountability and Finance score. More information on our previous rating methodologies can be found on our rating methodology page.
    Date PublishedOverall Rating
    9/1/2021
    rating
    5/1/2021
    rating

    Rating Report

    Impact & Measurement
    Score

    99

    This beacon estimates the actual impact a charity has on the lives of those it serves, and determines whether it is making good use of donor resources to achieve that impact.

    Assessments

    Impact

    100 out of 100 points

    75% of Impact & Measurement score
    Full Credit
    Partial Credit
    No Credit
    Impact Evaluation
    100 out of 100 points
    Impact Statement
    $22,776,722 total costs / $20,339,423 of financial assistance provided = roughly $1.12 provides a dollar's worth of financial assistance to a patient [2021 USD]
    Program Context
    Holocaust Survivor Assistance Program: The nonprofit provides financial assistance to patients with medical conditions.
    Data Time Period
    7/1/22 to 6/30/23
    Benchmark for Scoring
    Impact scores of financial assistance to patients programs are based on income generated relative to cost. Programs receive an Impact score of 100 if they provide a dollar worth of assistance for less than $1.25 and a score of 80 if they provide a dollar worth of assistance at a cost ranging from $1.25 to $2 . If a nonprofit reports impact but doesn't meet the benchmark for cost-effectiveness, it earns a score of 65. The nonprofit provides a dollar worth of financial assistance to a medical patient for less than $1.25.
    Methodology
    This impact score was determined through the Financial Assistance methodology which is fully detailed in the Charity Navigator Guide to Ratings. Analysis conducted in 2024 by Charity Navigator using data submitted by the nonprofit, theory and evidence from scientific research studies, and public datasets.
    Data Source
    The nonprofit submitted cost data and dollar value of all financial assistance provided to patients.

    Measurement

    95 out of 100 points

    25% of Impact & Measurement score
    Full Credit
    Partial Credit
    No Credit
    The Measuring Outcomes assessment evaluates how well a charity tracks progress towards its mission's outcomes.

    Displayed below are the responses provided by the charity for the Measuring Outcomes assessment. Each question is designed to address specific criteria, with responses eligible for full, partial, or no credit. Please refer to the scoring rubric for details on how responses are scored.

    Selected program: Jeff Masarek Behavioral Health Center, Submitted Jul-24
    Program Planning and Design
    26 out of 27 points
    This section assesses the use of crucial evaluation tools in program objective-setting and activities.
    Charity leadership uses information collected to make decisions regarding programs
    • Agree, uses information collected to improve programs
    Charity staff have training or experience in monitoring and evaluation
    • Agree, staff have experience working with monitoring and evaluation practices
    Charity has staff responsible for collecting information and measuring program progress
    • Agree, has dedicated team or department
    Charity has documents and reviews how program activities lead to change
    • Agree, documents and reviews
    Charity has researched program model before implementation in the following ways
    • Review of academic research
    • Consulted other nonprofits
    • Referred to the practices of similar nonprofits
    • Assessed ethical and legal compliance
    Charity revisits how program activities lead to change
    • Agree, does revisit how program activities lead to change
    Charity tracks program progress in the following ways
    • Tracks activities
    • Tracks outcomes and impacts
    • Tracks using timelines and milestones
    • Aligns plan with mission
    Program Development
    27 out of 27 points
    This section assesses the consideration of stakeholders in program objectives and activities.
    Charity identifies program target population needs in the following ways
    • Consulted other nonprofits
    • Conducted a literature review
    • Conducted interviews and/or focus groups
    • Conducted a needs assessment
    Charity considers practical, cultural, and political needs and interests of those served by program
    • Agree, charity is responsive to practical, cultural, and political needs
    Charity reviews the work whether similar organizations work on the same problem
    • Agree, reviews the work of similar organizations
    Charity uses SMART Goals
    • Agree, identified Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound (SMART) goals
    Data Collection and Analysis
    16 out of 18 points
    This section assesses the best practices used in collecting and analyzing program data.
    Charity tracks program information in the following ways
    • Collects data before a program is initiated
    • Collects data during program implementation
    • Collects data when a program is complete
    Charity collects programmatic information on those served by the program in the following ways
    • Identifies the number of those served by program
    • Collects demographic data of those served by program
    • Identifies the number of those successfully served by the program
    • Collects information about the quality of service from the target population
    Charity collects and analyzes program information to determine results in the following ways
    • Generates summary statistics of key metrics
    • Conducts data analysis over multiple points in time to measure change over time
    • Compares programs results to programs that work on the same issues
    Reporting and Distribution of Results
    17 out of 18 points
    This section assesses reporting and disseminating program results.
    Charity reports program results to key stakeholders
    • Funders
    • Staff and volunteers
    • Board members
    • Other organizations engaged in similar work
    • Findings are publicly available
    Charity reports both favorable and unfavorable results
    • Yes, charity reports both favorable of unfavorable results
    Use of Results
    9 out of 9 points
    This section assesses the use of results to guide learning.
    Charity uses program results to inform future work for the following reasons
    • Sustain and secure funding
    • Inform strategic planning
    • Improve program operations
    • Understand the impact of their work
    • Inform how we create future programs
    Favorite