American Postal Workers Union 6419 N J Shore Area Local

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222143538
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2011, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Toms River, NJ, USA
Phone
9089028501
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$60,551
Expenses
$44,107
Assets
$78,803
Liabilities
$74

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KELLY SALERNO (President)
  • TIMOTHY R KROHN (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • KELLY SALERNO (President)
  • GAIL WADE (HEALTH REL DIR)
  • DIANE BRENNAN (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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote the welfare, conditions and interest of postal carriers.

What it reported doing in 2022

The primary activity of the local is to organize postal workers and to protect their rights as employees. We have won some major grievances against management due to them violating the National Agreement between labor and management.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.2%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 77.1%; rating input score 77

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.2%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.79; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.2% of revenue deployed · 77.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $34K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.