American Forests
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 530196544
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, US
- Phone
- 202.737.1944
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Forest Conservation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $35,611,433
- Expenses
- $32,336,555
- Assets
- $16,963,330
- Liabilities
- $3,404,399
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Hilary Franz (President and CEO)
- James Daley (President/CEO (To 09/25))
- Hilary Franz (President/CEO (From 09/25))
Highest reported compensation
- James Daley (President/CEO (To 09/25)): $362,215 total reported compensation
- Peter Hutchins (COO): $265,192 total reported compensation
- Becky Turner (CPPO): $258,570 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To create healthy and resilient forests, from cities to large natural landscapes, that deliver essential benefits for climate, people, water and wildlife.
What it reported doing in 2024
Programs and Public Policy - American Forests' programmatic work is focused on growing forests that last through climate-resilient forestry, restoring forest landscapes to create greater wildfire resilience and investing in trees for healthier cities through Urban Forestry. We do so through leading forest science and innovation and by convening partners across federal and state agencies, local community leaders and mayors, Tribal nations, corporate partners and donors to drive measurable impact and outcomes. For more than 150 years, American Forests has also played a leading role in shaping and implementing federal climate and conservation legislation. Our work integrates science, policy, partnerships and on-the-ground action to restore our forests, mitigate the wildfire crisis and ensure tree canopy for every community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.
- 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.1%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 88.2%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $13.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 59.4%; rating input score 59; 12th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 9.2%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 80.1% of revenue deployed · 88.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $28.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $362K · 25 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.2M reported
- Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 67 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 54 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 59/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.