Casey Trees
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 311766444
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2028334010
- Rating
- 91
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $10,986,724
- Expenses
- $10,474,192
- Assets
- $207,979,606
- Liabilities
- $796,676
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jeff Stoiber (President)
- Kevin Kelso (Vice President)
- Mark Buscaino (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Mark Buscaino (Executive Director): $267,328 total reported compensation
- Andrew Schichtel (Chief Operating Officer): $219,577 total reported compensation
- Robert Shaut (Director, Tree Operations): $186,177 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 restore, enhance and protect the tree canopy of the nation's capital.
What it reported doing in 2024
Communications & Development: The Communications and Development department connects people to trees, through trees, and to Casey Trees. The department achieves this by providing high-quality content, memorable experiences, outstanding customer service, and expanding the organization's support network. They complete activities that disseminate information about Casey Trees to encourage engagement in, and broad support, of its work.
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 91% 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: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 80.1%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- 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: 97.5%; rating input score 98; 28th 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: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.7%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.86; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.2%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $8.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $267K · 22 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $339K reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 22 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 16 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.