St James Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 460702228
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2022–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Harding, NJ, USA
- Phone
- 7575726754
- Rating
- 38
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Homeowners & Tenants Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,200
- Expenses
- $4,200
- Assets
- $2,172
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
2 people listed
People named in this filing
- Sam LaNasa (Co-Manager and Treasurer)
- Megahn LaNasa (Co-Manager)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To Whom it May concern - The purpose of the St James Association is to serve as an HOW and to maintain and clear the right of way for all 7 resident homes on Glen Alpin Rd in Harding, NJ. We only use funds for road maintenance which is typically snow removal and tree debris removal. All seven home on the st. are subject to dues which are $150 qtrly or $600 annually which gives the HOA a $4200 budget, typically enough to cover road maintenance and snow removal over last few winters. I, Samuel W. LaNasa have recently taken over as Treasurer of the St. James Association from the founder, James Heineman (my neighbor) as he has fallen under some difficult health issues and is no longer able to run it. Any questions or concerns, please reach out at 757-572-6754 Sincerely, Sam LaNasa Co-Manager and Treasurer
What it reported doing in 2025
Maintain road right of way for 7 homes on road
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- Distribution model
- No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. 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: 82
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.