National Association on Drug Abuse Problems (New York State) Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 133185808
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2129861170
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alcohol, Drug Abuse, Treatment Only
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $16,551,659
- Expenses
- $15,720,558
- Assets
- $16,530,268
- Liabilities
- $4,966,857
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANTHONY G STANKOWSKI (COO/EXEC. VICE PRESIDENT)
- JOHN A DARIN (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
- JOSEPH A CASTELLUCCIO (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT)
- MERYL KORDOWER (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN A DARIN (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $452,483 total reported compensation
- ANTHONY G STANKOWSKI (COO/EXEC. VICE PRESIDENT): $321,191 total reported compensation
- THERESA MCBURNIE (DEPUTY CFO): $213,011 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 be a leading provider of innovative services that enable individuals to become healthy, productive and self-sufficient.
What it reported doing in 2024
Sucap provides assessment and referral services to public assistance clients who may have substance abuse-related barriers to work and wellness. Program staff link individuals to chemical dependence treatment and also review progress to assist them in recovery, leading to self-sufficiency. Sucap has conducted more than 980,000 assessments in support of New York city's welfare reform initiative.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 100% 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
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.5%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 84.7%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 80.5% of revenue deployed · 84.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $13.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $452K · 17 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $606K reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.