New Jersey State Association of Chiefs of Police

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222055622
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Marlton, NJ, USA
Phone
8563348943
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,302,137
Expenses
$4,109,587
Assets
$4,126,934
Liabilities
$1,107,064

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHIEF JOHN RUSSO (PRESIDENT)
  • CHIEF ANDREW CAGGIANO (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHIEF KEVIN CAREY (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHIEF GIACOMO SACCA (3RD VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHIEF MATTHEW BRENNER (4TH VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHIEF ANTHONY MANNA (VICE PRESIDENT AT-LARGE)

Highest reported compensation

  • MITCHELL C SKLAR ESQ CAE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $273,589 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 promote and enhance the highest ethical and professional standards in law enforcement at all levels throughout New Jersey.

What it reported doing in 2024

Examinations of police officers and trainees since 1945, the njsacop has administered police examinations as a cost-effective service to New Jersey municipalities. During these years, the njsacop has kept pace with the ever-changing requirements of the police testing field to ensure the institution and maintenance of the highest standards of police performance. The questions are developed to test a candidate's knowledge of key law enforcement, criminal justice and administrative issue areas, and can also be tailored for the particular needs of the agency.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% 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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.1%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $60.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.7%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.1% of revenue deployed · 81.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $274K · 13 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $667K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.