Ua Local 322 Benevolent Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
336830100
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Hammonton, NJ, USA
Phone
6095673322
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$80,857
Expenses
$28,812
Assets
$62,045
Liabilities
$10,000

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • David Bruce (Trustee)
  • Stephen Courant (Trustee)
  • George Young (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide Scholarships to dependent children of active members of UA Local 322.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 100% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

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: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th 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; 64th 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 64.4%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.15; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $24K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.