Capital Trees

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472998043
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Richmond, VA, USA
Phone
8043701610
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Beautification and Aesthetics

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$583,064
Expenses
$1,074,094
Assets
$392,327
Liabilities
$5,834

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SHELLY BARRICK PARSONS (EXECUTIVE DI): $82,577 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Capital trees' mission is to create a greener, more beautiful richmond, Virginia through the thoughtful planning and planting of trees and public gardens, mindful of the city's extraordinary heritage and location on the banks of the james river. We promote for a powerful connection between people and nature. We identify public funds, leverage those with private support, both human and capital, to create and maintatin better places for all. Identifying public property of outstanding interest and profound neglect (historical, environmental, aesthetic) and fund the design and implementation of exemplary projects, transforming richmond into a healthier, more livable city, mindful of its past and hopeful for its future.

What it reported doing in 2024

Capital trees efforts have been focused on continuing its planting and maintenance of the linear park along a critically important but neglected stretch of the kanawha canal and Virginia capital trail. The "low line" connects a recently enhanced great shiplock park (gsp) with richmond's much-loved canal walk.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% 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.
  • 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th 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: 7 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: Limited
    • 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: -84.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $883K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $83K · 22 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.