Friends of Lord Stirling Stable

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222512100
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Basking Ridge, NJ, USA
Phone
9087665955
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,500
Expenses
$6,080
Assets
$35,472

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • SUE TRAPP (VP)
  • BARBARA HUBER (PRES)
  • CAROL WEINGAERTNER (SECY)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote and support and supplement the education and recreational programs of lord stirling park riding stable (part of the somerset county park commission), and to educate the general public to the benefits and facilities available at lord stirling park riding stable and the somerset county park commission , to educate the general public on outdoor recreation including walking, hiking , birding and horseback riding, to carry out any and all activities in furtherance of the above purpose.

What it reported doing in 2025

Retired horse maintenance

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 8
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 7.6%; rating input score 8
  • Program expense ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 7

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.83; rating input score 86; 86th 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: -22.6% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -34% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 7.6% of revenue deployed · 6.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $420 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 8/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.