Research and Development Council of New Jersey Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 222188362
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Chatham, NJ, USA
- Phone
- 9732748336
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Professional Societies, Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,013,814
- Expenses
- $1,288,549
- Assets
- $527,268
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
33 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Anthony Cicatiello (President)
People named in this filing
- Mario M Casabona (Trustee)
- Anthony Cicatiello (President)
- Donald Geiss (Trustee)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Council's purpose is to advance research and development in New Jersey and promote excellence in STEM education through the assimilation and distribution of information, facilitation of stakeholders and constituents, and developing and implementing programs regarding R&D and STEM throughout the state.
What it reported doing in 2024
The New Jersey STEM Pathways Network, a strategic public-private alliance, aims to attract, cultivate and retain a 21st Century workforce in New Jersey, ensuring the state remains a top global competitor in STEM industry and continues its rich history of innovation. This network includes over 500 representatives from K-12, higher education, business, non-profits and government. It meets as a whole on a quarterly basis to discuss issues and solutions affecting the New Jersey STEM pipeline and incudes four working groups focused on STEM in early learning, computer science, teacher training and recruitment, and workforce development. NJSPN also manages New Jerseys five STEM learning ecosystems which are national recognized.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.6%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 76%; rating input score 76
- Fundraising efficiency: $2.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -27.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 96.6% of revenue deployed · 76% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 33 of 33 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $979K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 33 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed
- Consistency: 21 of 23 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.