Team Management 2000 Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223711294
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Hackensack, NJ, USA
Phone
2014874700
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,201,766
Expenses
$3,994,026
Assets
$4,117,202
Liabilities
$2,628,484

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AVA FAUSTIN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • AVA FAUSTIN (PRESIDENT): $330,000 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 mission of team management 2000 inc. Is to act as a positive change agent to at risk families and individuals, by delivering integrated primary and mental healthcare, substance abuse recovery services, and a continuum of support through a holistic and non-traditional methodology of educational and living skills training, that encourages the importance of healthier lifestyle choices, self-sufficiency, and mental and emotional stability.

What it reported doing in 2024

Through grand funded programs, team mangement provides substance abuse and mental health services to improve the quality and availability of substance abuse protection, alcohol and drug addiction treatment and mental health services. These programs serves multiple under-served at-risk populations (including youth and young adults ages 13-24) in need of housing, substance abuse treatment and mental health services. The organization provided support to over 200 clients.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 86% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 21
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.9%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 71.6%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 23.2%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.03; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.64; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.9% of revenue deployed · 71.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $330K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $332K reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.