Allegheny Goatscape Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
815149351
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4125270538
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Beautification and Aesthetics

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$255,463
Expenses
$239,509
Assets
$92,069
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Gavin Deming (Executive Director, Ex-Officio)
  • Martina Wolf Battistone (Board President)
  • Emily Bell (Board Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Gavin Deming (Executive Director, Ex-Officio): $60,272 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Allegheny GoatScape's mission is to reduce invasive and unwanted vegetation in public spaces and vacant lots, utilizing goats for browsing. Working in and around Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Allegheny GoatScape accomplishes this mission by partnering with organizations, land owners, and businesses, allowing our animals to eat vegetation on the overgrown properties. Giving goats access to intentional properties removes vegetation in an ecologically-friendly and efficient manner, setting the stage for additional land management and restoration. Allegheny GoatScape also promotes goat husbandry and resources access for those interested in raising goats in the Pittsburgh region, and invasive species education for those seeking to improve their local ecology.

What it reported doing in 2024

AGS contracts different organizations, municipalities, companies and land owners to address invasive plant species issues throughout Allegheny County, PA. We use the same model across our projects as we do with the City of Pittsburgh and our Pittsburgh Tree Canopy Alliance projects. In 2024, AGS addressed 26 acres across 15 different projects. Some of the highlights included the GAP Trail along the Monongahela River in Homestead, fee for service provided by Waterfront Association; private wooded area, fee for service provided by Heinz Estate; Hays Woods Park, fee for service provided by The Pittsburgh Parks Conservancy; wooded area adjacent to new development in Fairywood, Pittsburgh, fee for service provided by RIDC; overgrown areas on Penn State University - Greater Allegheny Campus, fee for service provided by the Penn State University; and others. In addition to land management, our staff provided outreach events at some of the working locations to share with the public the importance of native species and how goats provide a valuable service in supporting the local landscape care. Additional support for these projects were subsidized through non-discretionary donations. All revenue supports winter care of the animals when they are not actively working on landscaping service projects.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: 6.2%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.38; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 20.8% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $203K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $60K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.