Friendship Circle New Jersey

Legal name: Friendship Circle New Jersey Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463008950
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Livingston, NJ, United States
Phone
973-251-0200
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Support N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,473,285
Expenses
$3,155,510
Assets
$3,167,090
Liabilities
$923,142

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

35 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RABBI ZALMAN GROSSBAUM (CHAIRMAN AND CEO)
  • DAVID ORBACH (PRESIDENT)
  • BARRY LEFKOWITZ (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RABBI ZALMAN GROSSBAUM (CHAIRMAN AND CEO): $193,134 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Based on the bedrock foundation of V’Ahavta L’Reacha Kamocha (Love your fellow as yourself), it is the Friendship Circle’s mission to: Engage children and teens with special needs through a full range of experiences; Provide parents and families of children and teens with special needs with much-needed respite and support; Enrich, inspire and motivate teens through the sharing of themselves with others; Create a sense of responsibility and connection to the Jewish community for teens through educational and social opportunities.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Friendship Circle's wide array of innovative programming promotes a greater awareness and understanding of both the unique needs and the unique gifts of those with special needs, and encourages respect and empathy for those facing difficult challenges.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 98
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.1%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 73.5%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 97.1%; rating input score 97; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.5%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.1%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 52.1% of revenue deployed · 73.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 34 of 35 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $193K · 35 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.