Jewish Association for Developmental Disabilities (J-ADD)
Legal name: Jewish Association for Developmental Dis
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 222842847
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Paramus, NJ, United States
- Phone
- 201-457-0058
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Residential Care & Adult Day Programs
- Affiliation
- Judaism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,258,396
- Expenses
- $8,056,035
- Assets
- $6,394,563
- Liabilities
- $439,475
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN J WINER PHD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- SHARON HORN (PRESIDENT)
- CAROL KREINDEL (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN J WINER PHD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $316,714 total reported compensation
- DENISE JAFFE-ALTSCHULER (DIR. OF FINANCE AND ADMIN): $166,959 total reported compensation
- CHERYL MINKOFF (DIRECTOR OF TRAINING/QA/QI): $156,453 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
J-ADD empowers individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities to lead fulfilling, independent lives in the community while simultaneously supporting their families of origin. Using a person centered approach our supported living services facilitate individuals build life skills, pursue employment, and stay engaged within their communities.
What it reported doing in 2025
Operation of group homes and apartments located within bergen county in New Jersey which provide kosher, nonsectarian living arrangements for individuals with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 93% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 89
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.4%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 77.9%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $7.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -11%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.4%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 86.4% of revenue deployed · 77.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $317K · 12 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.