Green Brook Educational and Athletic Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453753198
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Green Brook, NJ, USA
Phone
7329681052
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$362,595
Expenses
$327,626
Assets
$401,225
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHANIE BYELICK (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIAN MOJTA (AFTER CARE DIRECTOR): $20,906 total reported compensation
  • PETER HOCKMEYER (CAMP DIRECTOR): $16,959 total reported compensation
  • DANIELLE COOPER (SECRETARY): $12,774 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support the youth of green brook through athletics and increase awareness of the importance of sports and physical fitness. The foundation will also provide higher education scholarships for green brook residents.

What it reported doing in 2025

Athletic programs and summer camps. The organization provides before school and after school programs under the supervision of certified teachers who are also employed by the local school district. Program activities include snacks, homework time, peer tutoring, large and small group instruction, demostrations, presentations, structured play, unstructured play, educational computer time, arts and crafts, seasonal events and music. Fees are reduced for each additional child enrolled per family in the morning and afternoon programs.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.22; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.5%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.7% of revenue deployed · 97% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $318K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $21K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.