Health Care Association of Nj

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
210699958
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Hamilton, NJ, USA
Phone
6098908700
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,255,400
Expenses
$3,382,823
Assets
$1,112,385
Liabilities
$96,362

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREW ARONSON (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREW ARONSON (CEO): $462,700 total reported compensation
  • JOHN INDYK (VICE PRESIDE): $232,000 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 cultivate, promote and disseminate knowledge and information concerning health care facilities and subjects relating thereto.

What it reported doing in 2025

Education the hcanj education programs, designed by the education committee comprised of health care facility owners, administrators and executive directors, management personnel, nursing personnel, and other disciplines, offer professional continuing education that meet specific criteria designed to provide long term care professional with accurate timely information regarding state and federal regulations, guidelines, best practices and tools to enhance and promote high quality long term care services in New Jersey. These educational offerings are approved by state and national licensing boards for continuing education credit units (ceu) for licensed/ certified professionals requiring same. The educational needs of the membership and public are periodically sampled in order to develop general educational training and targeted professional education responsive to the measured need.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Affiliate network. The nonprofit sent 63% of its reported program spending through affiliated organizations.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 27
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30.5%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 29.4%; rating input score 29
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30.5% of revenue deployed · 29.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $994K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $463K · 2 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.