Bedford 2030 Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
320298560
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Bedford Hills, NY, USA
Phone
9146202411
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$859,829
Expenses
$691,984
Assets
$1,273,223
Liabilities
$2,876

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAREN SABATH (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KEVIN BRENNER (DIRECTOR)
  • ANDREW CHINTZ (TREASURER)
  • ELLEN CONRAD (DIRECTOR)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Community awareness, education, resources and tools to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect natural resources.

What it reported doing in 2024

Form 990, part iii, line 4d, other program services: other various program services - examples include the greenlight award, take it or leave it shed, and other waste reduction efforts. Expenses 103,011. Including grants of 0. Revenue 14,065. Form 990, part vi, section a, line 6: bedford 2030 added "members" to the corporation in february 2022 in order to qualify for a nys gaming licence and hold an ev raffle. The members meet annually and elect the board of directors. Form 990, part vi, section a, line 7a: the organization's members have the right to elect the members of the board of directors as vacancies occur. Form 990, part vi, section b, line 11b: review of form 990 was conducted by the president and treasurer prior to filing with the IRS. Form 990, part vi, section b, line 15: employee performance evaluations are performed to provide feedback to employees. When appropriate, the evaluations may be used in determining compensation, promotion and disciplinary action. Job performance is evaluated through the year both in discussions with supervisors and through an annual written evaluation. This written annual evaluation is presented to the employee for discussion. All copies of annual evaluations are dated maintained on our payroll system, gusto. Each year the board of directors reviews and approves salary increases, based on the availability of funding. Recommendations for salary increases for employees are based on the results of their performance review. Form 990, part vi, section c, line 19: documents are available upon request. Form 990, part xii, line 2c there were no procedural changes from the prior year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.8%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.5%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.84; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.7% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.8% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.8% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $538K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.