New Jersey Fencing Alliance
Legal name: New Jersey Fencing Alliance Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 223754996
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Maplewood, NJ, USA
- Phone
- (973) 762 - 6363
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Amateur Sports
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $311,897
- Expenses
- $297,264
- Assets
- $147,331
- Liabilities
- $269,962
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- Frank A Mustilli (Managing Director): $26,000 total reported compensation
- Blanche Mustilli (Director): $9,500 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 provide the highest level of instruction and state-of-the-art facilities for the sport of fencing. Promoting a socially cohesive environment for interaction amongst our diverse members. Furthermore, producing fencers of Olympic caliber, through the active sponsorship of world-class training programs, competitions, and teams.
What it reported doing in 2025
As indicated in our Mission Statement Part III #1. New Jersey Fencing Alliance dedicates itself to its student athletes scholastic and athletic development. This year we expanded our after school teachings to three schools. 2025 was a year that the club continued reestablishing itself in our new location. We continued working with our students who have learning disabilities they participate at all levels (beginner, intermediate and advanced) their enjoyment and progress is what matters most to our coaches.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 83% 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 68
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 95.3%; rating input score 95
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.7%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.83; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -12.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 95.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $297K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $26K · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 11 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.