Shipping Association of New York & New Jersey

Legal name: New York Shipping Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
135637319
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Edison, New Jersey, USA
Phone
732-452-7800
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$320,699,294
Expenses
$267,481,771
Assets
$448,079,105
Liabilities
$26,679,230

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nardi John (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Nardi John (President): $1,006,189 total reported compensation
  • Winfree Susan (VP of Workforce Development): $819,735 total reported compensation
  • Massaro Daniel (CFO): $583,037 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Shipping Association of New York & New Jersey mission is to represent the interests of its members in maximizing the efficiency, cost-competitiveness, safety and quality of marine cargo operations in the Port of New York and New Jersey.

What it reported doing in 2024

New York Shipping Association, Inc. (d/b/a Shipping Association of New York & New Jersey (SANYNJ)) is an association of various employers of waterfront labor and ocean carrier companies engaged in the shipping industry in the Port of New York and New Jersey (PONY/NJ). Program service expenses relate to negotiating and administering collective bargaining agreements between the members of SANYNJ and representatives of their waterfront employees.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 95% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 87
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 44th 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.6%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.68; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 27 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $570K reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.