Jersey Shore Work Camp Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464015678
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Hazlet, NJ, USA
Phone
7327875624
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,700
Expenses
$2,334
Assets
$7,850

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM BECHTOLDT (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • WILLIAM BECHTOLDT (PRESIDENT)
  • GAIL BECHTOLDT (1ST VP/TREAS)
  • KARRIE JOHNSON (2ND VICE PRE)

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 provide home repairs and improvements for homeowners, whose home has been damaged by super storm sandy or by other natural and man made emergencies as well as for disadvantaged homeowners with physical disabilities or serious illnesses, located in the bayshore area or nearby areas of New Jersey.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization organized a "summer work camp" where approximately 450 high school youths and advisors from all over the united states and canada come together to volunteer and help with repairs to homes for the handicapped, low income, seriously ill or elderly who cannot afford or perform repairs to their homes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.3%; rating input score 89

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -37.3%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.36; rating input score 77; 77th 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: -33% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.4% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -20.4% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.