Zvika Klein writes in The Jerusalem Post:
Four years ago, sitting at my Makor Rishon desk with a stack of Form 990s, I stumbled on a line that made me almost fall off of my chair: The CEO of the Friends of the Israel Defense Forces was taking home more than $1 million a year – more than the charity gave, annually, to the widows and orphans of IDF soldiers.
That discovery became my 2021 exposé on the FIDF’s decision to cut every shekel of its grant to the IDF Widows and Orphans Organization. I wrote then that something in the culture felt “toxic.” It turns out, the smell only got stronger.
Fast-forward to July 2025. An 18-page internal probe, leaked to Ynet and later obtained by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, accuses FIDF board chair Morey Levovitz of running the charity like a personal fiefdom: steering contracts to friends, sidelining professional staff, and racking up roughly $53,000 in luxury-travel reimbursements that may violate the group’s own rules. The San Francisco chapter, one of the FIDF’s most generous donor pools, has frozen contributions in protest.
This is not okay. Why? Because donors thought their gifts were racing to the front lines. Instead, almost half of last year’s $280 million windfall, raised after Hamas’s October 7 massacre, never left the FIDF’s bank account. Consultant Arnie Draiman called it “a hurricane outside and a rainy-day fund inside.” Meanwhile, grassroots groups crowd-funded basic helmets for reservists…
In January 2024, the American Society for Yad Vashem, for decades the Holocaust museum’s primary US fundraiser, quietly posted a banner on its homepage: “Effective January 1, 2024, the ASYV is no longer affiliated with Yad Vashem.” The split followed a bitter battle over an $80 million endowment that the ASYV’s board says Yad Vashem chairman Dani Dayan tried to “raid.”
To be fair, the FIDF’s audited statements show a lean fundraising machine: it spends about seven cents to raise a dollar, and roughly 80% of outlays land in program buckets rather than overhead. Still, executive pay remains eye-popping: CEO Steven Weil took home $667,000 in 2022, while the top 14 staffers shared $4 million. Salaries are not sins, but they demand proportionate results and humility.
On the other side of the ledger, the ASYV supplied up to 30% of Yad Vashem’s annual budget before relations soured. Losing that stream mid-war is not just a governance soap opera; it is a strategic risk to Israel’s flagship Holocaust-education center, precisely when antisemitism is spiking.
Morey Levovitz was the chair of Harkham Hillel Hebrew Academy. On Jan. 20, 2007, I wrote: Harkham Hillel Hebrew Academy’s Financial Problems
On Aug. 18, 2007, I wrote: Morey Levovitz Resigning From Hillel Presidency
When Steven Weil ran Beth Jacob synagogue in Beverly Hills between 2000 and 2009, he was divisive and alienated many of his fellow rabbis and members of the community. He left in 2009 to run the Orthodox Union, but was controversial and marginalized there until leaving in 2020 to run the FIDF.
Grok says:
American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science Executive Compensation: In 2012–2013, Marshall Levin, the executive vice president, earned $723,000, nearly double his previous year’s compensation. While this data is older, it reflects a historical pattern of high salaries at Jewish “Friends-of” organizations supporting Israeli institutions.
Context: The Weizmann Institute’s U.S. fundraising arm is part of the “Friends-of” model, raising significant funds for scientific research in Israel. High executive pay was noted as a concern, especially given the tax-exempt status of these charities, which rely on donor generosity.
Criticism: The Jewish Daily Forward (cited in 2014) reported that one in every twenty dollars donated to Jewish charities goes to such “Friends-of” groups, often with sizable executive salaries, raising questions about whether these funds are best spent on administration versus direct support for Israeli causes.
International Fellowship of Christians and Jews (IFCJ) Executive Compensation: In 2013, Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein, IFCJ’s founder and president, earned $491,000 for his role in raising funds for Israel from American evangelicals. While not a 2025 figure, this example underscores the trend of high salaries at Jewish-affiliated nonprofits with significant U.S. operations.
Context: IFCJ, like FIDF, operates as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) and channels funds to Israel, often for social and military-related causes. The high salary was notable given the organization’s reliance on grassroots evangelical donors, similar to FIDF’s reliance on Jewish diaspora contributions.
Criticism: Critics argue that such salaries, while legal, may erode donor trust when funds are perceived as padding executive paychecks rather than directly aiding Israeli beneficiaries.Broader Context and Analysis“Friends-of” Charity Model: Klein’s article critiques the “Friends-of” structure, where U.S.-based nonprofits act as intermediaries for Israeli institutions. These organizations often justify high salaries by citing the need to attract top talent in competitive U.S. markets like New York or Los Angeles. However, when salaries outstrip direct aid (e.g., FIDF’s CEO pay versus widow/orphan support), it fuels perceptions of “padding paychecks” and “hoarding cash.”
Donor Oversight Gaps: Klein emphasizes that donors rarely scrutinize financials, dazzled by celebrity galas (e.g., FIDF events with Ashton Kutcher or Mike Tyson). This allows high salaries and questionable spending (e.g., Levovitz’s luxury travel) to persist unchecked.
Comparative Data: According to Glassdoor, FIDF salaries in 2025 ranged from $42,037 for entry-level roles to $231,867 for the Chief Development Officer, with employees rating compensation poorly (2/5 stars). This suggests internal discontent with pay structures, possibly reflecting top-heavy salary distributions.
Other Nonprofits: While specific 2025 salary data for other Jewish nonprofits like the Jewish Federations or UJA-Federation of New York is unavailable, historical trends show that large Jewish charities often pay executives in the $300,000–$700,000 range, comparable to secular nonprofits but controversial when juxtaposed with urgent needs like IDF reservist gear or trauma therapy.
International Fellowship of Christians and Jews (IFCJ) Executive: Yael Eckstein-Farkas, President and CEO
Compensation: $797,547 (2022); $776,301 (2021); ~$4 million total from 2017–2022.Money Raised: $228 million (2022); $220 million (2021).
Salary-to-Raised Ratio: ~0.35% ($797,547 ÷ $228 million in 2022).
Context: IFCJ reported $132 million in grants (2022), primarily to its Israeli arm, Hakeren L’Yedidut, but spent $62 million on fundraising/advertising and $16 million on compensation. Donor comments on Paddock Post criticize Eckstein’s salary as excessive, given the charity’s emotional appeals for impoverished Jews. In 2013, her father, Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein, earned $491,000, showing a pattern of high executive pay.
Disproportionality: The salary is notable when 27% of funds go to fundraising, and only 58% ($132 million) to grants, suggesting a significant portion of donations supports overhead rather than direct aid.
American Society for Yad Vashem (ASYV) Executive: Specific 2025 salary data unavailable; historical data (e.g., 2014 Forward survey) shows ASYV executives in the $200,000–$400,000 range.
Money Raised: Historically provided 30% of Yad Vashem’s budget (estimated $10–15 million annually pre-2024 split). Managed an $80 million endowment.
Salary-to-Raised Ratio: Unclear due to lack of 2025 data, but high endowment management suggests potential for elevated salaries.
Context: The 2024 split with Yad Vashem over the $80 million endowment raised governance concerns. Klein critiques ASYV’s board for prioritizing control over funds rather than Holocaust education, implying high administrative costs (potentially including salaries) may not align with mission delivery.
Disproportionality: Without exact figures, the endowment dispute and loss of Yad Vashem’s funding stream suggest resources may be tied up in U.S. operations, potentially inflating executive pay relative to program impact.
American Committee for the Weizmann Institute of Science Executive: Marshall Levin, Executive Vice President
Compensation: $723,000 (2013).
Money Raised: ~$60–80 million annually (based on 2013 Forward estimates for Weizmann’s U.S. arm).
Salary-to-Raised Ratio: ~0.9–1.2% ($723,000 ÷ $60–80 million).Context: The 2013 salary nearly doubled from the prior year, drawing scrutiny for its size relative to funds supporting Israeli scientific research. The Forward noted that such “Friends-of” charities often allocate significant sums to U.S. administration.
Disproportionality: The high ratio (approaching 1%) and rapid salary increase suggest a potential misalignment, especially if a large portion of funds stays in the U.S. rather than reaching Weizmann’s labs.
Jewish Agency for Israel Executive: Amira Ahronoviz, CEO (2021 data; specific salary not listed but noted as high in Paddock Post).
Compensation: Top executives historically in the $300,000–$500,000 range (based on 2014 Forward survey).
Money Raised: Receives significant U.S. funding via Jewish Federations of North America and United Israel Appeal (~$200 million annually).
Salary-to-Raised Ratio: ~0.15–0.25% (estimated $300,000–$500,000 ÷ $200 million).Context: The Jewish Agency facilitates immigration and integration in Israel, but its U.S.-based funding arms face criticism for high overhead. Klein’s broader point about “Friends-of” groups applies here, as donors may not realize how much stays in U.S. operations.
Disproportionality: While the ratio is lower than others, the large funding volume and complex structure raise questions about whether executive pay aligns with direct immigrant support.
Analysis of Disproportionate Salary Ratios
Definition of Disproportionality: A salary is considered disproportionate when it represents a high percentage of funds raised (e.g., >0.5%) or when program spending is low relative to overhead (e.g., <70% of funds to programs). Klein’s article emphasizes cases where salaries outstrip aid to beneficiaries (e.g., FIDF’s CEO pay vs. widow/orphan support).Key Observations:FIDF stands out for its high salary ($667,000–$1 million) and unspent $100–140 million in 2023, making the 0.24% ratio misleadingly low since much of the money raised didn’t reach soldiers.IFCJ’s 0.35% ratio is concerning because only 58% of funds go to grants, with high fundraising costs ($62 million) and a $797,547 CEO salary drawing donor ire. Weizmann’s 0.9–1.2% ratio is among the highest, reflecting a significant portion of donations consumed by one executive’s pay. ASYV and Jewish Agency lack precise 2025 data, but their governance issues (endowment disputes, complex U.S. structures) suggest potential for high salaries relative to mission impact.Industry Comparison: Nonprofit executive salaries often range from 0.1–0.5% of revenue in large U.S. charities. Jewish philanthropies align with this but face unique scrutiny due to emotional donor appeals (e.g., IDF soldiers, Holocaust memory) and expectations of direct aid to Israel.
YNET reports:
Chairman accused of sidelining CEO and micromanaging staff
At the eye of the storm is FIDF board chairman Morey Levovitz, who took on the volunteer role two years ago. According to the report, he effectively assumed the role of CEO—without board approval—while marginalizing current CEO Steve Weil.
He has reportedly overridden staff decisions, hand-picked the management committee from a list he compiled himself and interfered so extensively in daily operations that many staff felt he had fully taken over. In meetings, he allegedly declared: “I run the show.”
A particularly contentious issue involved a partnership with Israeli travel company Ortra, which is reportedly owned by a personal acquaintance of Levovitz. The deal bypassed FIDF’s usual competitive bidding process and employees complained that the company’s services were both pricier and less professional than those previously used.
While Levovitz denied any personal connection to the firm, the investigative committee concluded that the arrangement posed a conflict of interest and recommended it be terminated. The report also found that Levovitz had been reimbursed around $53,000 for travel and hotel expenses, well beyond what FIDF’s bylaws typically allow.
Allegations of bias, misleading donors and extravagant spending
The report details additional concerns, including accusations of bias against Israeli employees and donor misrepresentation—specifically, that donors were led to believe they were solely funding apartments for lone soldiers, when in fact those projects were co-funded.
It also highlights lavish spending on official delegations, with accommodations booked at high-end hotels such as the Hilton Tel Aviv and the Waldorf Astoria Jerusalem. These practices, the committee warned, were contributing to declining morale among staff and rising frustration among donors, many of whom had begun to raise questions about the use and transparency of their contributions.
A further flashpoint was the sudden dismissal of FIDF’s longtime legal counsel, attorney Steve Rubin, who had served for over four decades. Rubin said he was forced out after being excluded from the management committee, which made it impossible for him to continue offering legal oversight. The committee cautioned that board meetings were held without legal supervision during that period—posing serious risks to the organization.
Rift with San Francisco branch threatens donor relations
Tensions also escalated with FIDF’s San Francisco branch, which raises approximately $7.5 million annually. After the regional director was dismissed without explanation, local leaders said they felt ignored by the national office and announced a freeze on donations.
“It’s like we don’t matter to the national office,” said one source familiar with the details. The committee characterized the episode as a strategic failure and warned that donor communities were nearing a breaking point.
Inside the organization, many employees described a culture of silence and fear. They reported an absence of performance reviews, poor communication and uncertainty about their roles. “The current leadership is weak,” said one employee. “All decisions go through Murray.”
Even critics acknowledged Levovitz’s longstanding dedication to Jewish and pro-Israel causes, including his support for AIPAC and the Orthodox Union. “At some point,” said one insider, “it became more than a hobby for him.”
Resignation calls, donor revolt and a looming crisis
Two days after Ynet reached out for comment, FIDF board members received an emergency email from veteran donor Zvi Alon—husband of former board member Ricki Alon—calling for Levovitz’s resignation.
“I have verified that the report has been leaked to the media,” Alon wrote. “The damage to FIDF’s image and finances will be catastrophic if this story breaks without an appropriate response.”
He urged the board to immediately accept Lebovitz’s resignation and begin reform. “Any attempt to deflect or minimize this will only deepen the crisis,” Alon wrote. “Silence or delay is not an option.”
Meanwhile, Ynet spoke with three senior staffers who accused Levovitz of treating FIDF like “his personal property.” “He hires, he fires, he protects his friends and hijacks decision-making,” one said.
