Gsh Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270536467
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Highland Park, NJ, USA
Phone
7325326865
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,876,817
Expenses
$3,834,215
Assets
$5,171,617
Liabilities
$1,879,426

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LOUIS DELUCIA (EXECUTIVE DI): $285,315 total reported compensation
  • TYRONE BOWDEN (SECRETARY): $106,008 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To empower and support the community's most vunerable through safe and stable housing, comprehensive services, and opportunities for personal and educational growth.

What it reported doing in 2024

Garden state home (gsh) provided homelessness diversion services to households at risk of entering shelter. Gsh staff worked with individuals and families to identify immediate housing alternatives, reconnect with family or other supports, and develop short-term housing plans. Limited financial assistance and case management were provided to help households remain safely housed and avoid entry into the homeless system. Garden state home (gsh) conducted outreach and engagement services to individuals experiencing unsheltered homelessness in rural and suburban communities. Gsh staff engaged individuals in the field to assess needs, provide basic necessities, and connect clients to housing resources, emergency shelter, and supportive services. The program focused on reaching underserved populations and facilitating pathways to stable housing. Garden state home (gsh) operated supportive housing programs that provided stable housing combined with wraparound supportive services to vulnerable populations. These programs served youth aging out of foster care, individuals in recovery from substance use disorders, and extremely low- income households with histories of homelessness. Gsh delivered case management, housing stabilization support, and connections to community- based services to promote long-term housing stability and self-sufficiency.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 56
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.3%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,632.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 34.8%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.35; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.2%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 33.3% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 39.5% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 44.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.3% of revenue deployed · 97% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $285K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.