Advocacy for Drug Education in New Jersey Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 813442390
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Three Bridges, NJ, USA
- Phone
- 8489921370
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $33,970
- Expenses
- $26,826
- Assets
- $33,235
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- JOHN BENNET JR (CHAIRMAN)
- ERIC HIGGINS (TREASURER)
- MEGHAN KELLER (SECRETARY)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization was formed to implement, oversee and support educational programs throughout New Jersey that provide students with decision-making skills needed to avoid drugs and other dangerous activities.
What it reported doing in 2024
The training, development, evaluation and implementation of age appropriate curricula for delivery by instructors to elementary, middle and high school students as well as to parents. These specialized curricula are designed to prevent the use of illegal drugs, the abuse of prescription and over the counter medicines, bullying, and other destructive behaviors in order that the students can lead productive, safe and healthy lives.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 57
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 21%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.24; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $27K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.