Returning Citizens Support Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
873388703
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Newark, NJ, USA
Phone
9736424646
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$955,020
Expenses
$342,646
Assets
$643,824
Liabilities
$5,448

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EDWIN ORTIZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • EDWIN ORTIZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $58,876 total reported compensation
  • CARMELO ORTIZ (CO-DIRECTOR): $48,443 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Returning citizens support group's mission is to reduce recidivism through healing, family reunification, and community building by providing comprehensive wraparound services to returning citizens and their families.

What it reported doing in 2025

General operations, housing & wraparound reentry services program: in 2025, rcsg helped 350 returning citizens and their families through their wraparound reentry support service model. Services include but are not limited to housing, employment, id security, food access, transportation, clothing, education, counseling, financial and digital literacy, and more. General programs includes the salaries and other operating costs of the organization, along with some service expenses. Rcsg also offers a supportive housing program that provides wraparound services to residents (eligibility 55+ years old, returning citizen) who are housing insecure or in a transitional housing circumstance. Wraparound services include but are not limited to housing, employment, id security, food access, transportation, clothing, education, counseling, financial and digital literacy, and more.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 63% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.4%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 70.7%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 86.3%; rating input score 86; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 64.1%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.3%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 102.5% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 93.1% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.4% of revenue deployed · 70.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $242K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $59K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.