Atlanta Beltline Partnership Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562464486
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2021
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
4044464405
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$24,928,640
Expenses
$45,166,575
Assets
$28,044,471
Liabilities
$5,547,194

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

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT BRAWNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MICHAEL DAVIS (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT BRAWNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $244,692 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL DAVIS (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $160,121 total reported compensation
  • NICOLE LOVE (DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE PATN): $136,241 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 organization fulfills, protects and preserves the atlanta beltline vision by raising funds and building partnerships that enable the project, engage the public and empower the residents of surrounding neighborhoods.

What it reported doing in 2024

Empower the residents - the atlanta beltline offers parks, trails, and future transit, attracting private investment and creating jobs. In collaboration with its partners, the organization connects atlanta beltline residents with resources to help them live, work, and thrive. Through philanthropic funding, the organization has enrolled 253 households in its legacy resident retention program, which covers property tax increases through 2030, allowing low-income homeowners to stay in their homes and leverage the benefits of rising property values for generational wealth-building outcomes. The organization offers a wide array of empowerment workshops, both in-person and virtual, to connect residents with partners and resources to help them stay in their homes and mitigate displacement pressures. (continued on sch. O)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 96% of its reported program spending out as 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.1%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: $48.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -81.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.62; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $43.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $245K · 30 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $365K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 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: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.