New Jersey Human Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223793394
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Trenton, NJ, USA
Phone
6093967474
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$354,585
Expenses
$534,305
Assets
$42,742
Liabilities
$106,454

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • VERNARD R LEAK (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $68,005 total reported compensation
  • LYNDA T RASSMANN (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $55,050 total reported compensation
  • TROY E BRIGHT (OFFICE MANAGER): $44,742 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

HIV prevention and awareness

What it reported doing in 2020

To respond to the HIV pandemic for nj churches and houses of worship. Staff and volunteers partner with houses or worship to enhance existing ministries or develop ones that include HIV-related education and services. Ministries targeted include: ministries to women, men, youth, seniors and the incarcerated; food and shelter ministries; and others. HIV services include support groups, grief-related support, quilting groups, HIV education sessions, and other HIV services. The nj state div.of HIV/AIDS states that one in every 66 african-americans in nj is living with HIV/AIDS.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 98% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -50.7%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.49; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.6%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $479K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $68K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.