Madison Rotary Club Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223337586
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Madison, NJ, USA
Phone
9736157066
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$198,094
Expenses
$217,821
Assets
$114,925
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John Hogan (President)
  • James Fraser (Past-President)
  • Curt Beaudoiun (President-Elect)

People named in this filing

  • David Duran (Trustee)
  • Joseph Smith (Membership Secretary)
  • John Hogan (President)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The Foundation raises funds for three charitable activities - fighting food insecurity, supporting educational programs and funding community organizations. Program services also include weekly meetings for members and the public, and periodic community events to advance and fund our mission and charitable activities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Financial support for youth and educational activities: college scholarships and community service recognition awards for high school students (see Schedule I, Part III for details); distribution of dictionaries to 240 Madison 3rd graders; mentoring and financial support for the Interact Club, a Madison high school service organization; and support for Rotary programs focused on youth exchange and leadership development. New this year was funding a multi-year social and emotional learning program in the Madison public schools (see Schedule O for details).

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 63% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, 36% for grants, and 6% for affiliated organizations.

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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.3%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 10.9%; rating input score 11; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $201K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 42 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 11/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.