Nj Hmo Association Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 223306073
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Trenton, NJ, USA
- Phone
- 6095818237
- Rating
- 38
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,213,237
- Expenses
- $1,158,816
- Assets
- $2,637,236
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WARDELL SANDERS (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- WARDELL SANDERS (PRESIDENT): $429,243 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The New Jersey association of health plans (njahp) is a non-profit corporation created to serve its member health plans with a mission of fostering understanding in the value that health plans contribute to New Jersey's health care system. Among other ways, njahp does this by: -informing the public about our philosophy and the value proposition offered by commercial and medicaid health plans. -educating policy makers, regulators, and opinion leaders on the implications of specific policy proposals. -promoting collaborative efforts among health plans, providers, purchasers, brokers and consumers to expand access to high-quality, affordable, and accessible health care. -acting as a resource for interested parties on New Jersey's health care system. -promoting opportunities and forums for health plan members and business partners to meet, exchange ideas, and discuss critical issues affecting health care in the state.
What it reported doing in 2025
Membership funds are utilized to communicate the needs of our constituency amongst several outside organizations, including areas of government, regulatory agencies, and other industry partners.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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
REVIEW - 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: 60
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 51
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.28; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 37%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $429K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.