Committee On Sustainability Assessment

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453867653
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2158255500
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,385,938
Expenses
$2,964,762
Assets
$4,348,992
Liabilities
$446,823

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LIAM J BRODY (Chief Executive Officer)
  • DANIELE GIOVANNUCCI (FORMER PRESIDENT(thru 05/2023))

Highest reported compensation

  • LIAM J BRODY (Chief Executive Officer): $189,422 total reported compensation
  • JESSICA MULLAN (SR. DIR. MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS): $134,381 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW HIMMEL (Sr Dir Sustainability Intel Sy): $126,903 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We accelerate sustainability by advancing smart performance metrics and innovative technologies, enabling users to take better decisions that make a tangible difference for people and planet.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cosa facilitates the collective impact of institutions dedicated to accelerating rural prosperity & agricultural sustainability in the world's poorest countries. Driven by the conviction that reliable data enables better decision-making & greater accountability, we develop & share pragmatic indicators & solutions to better measure & manage sustainability. Creating a "public square" for alignment of purpose & understanding serves everyone equally. The cosa network is an incubator of lessons that catalyze fact-based decision-making to improve sustainability programs in food & agriculture. We collaborate with a diverse set of partners from research institutes & development agencies to private companies & foundations - in order to build local capacity in many countries & among tens of thousands of farmers. Our core work is four pronged: 1) design - cosa works together with partners & local communities to design & implement sustainability assessments that address the important challenges that they face. By working through local organizations cosa improves their practices, ensures local relevance, & helps them conform to international standards of best practices so that they can know the actual impacts or long term sustainability of diverse types of projects or investments in rural communities. 2) measure - we apply a consistent, standardized approach which ensures comparability, provides clarity, & reduces costs. Cosa trains & supports local entities or institutions with tools & services to conduct the hands-on fieldwork & assessments themselves. This ensures the capacity building that is necessary for long term adoption of sound monitoring and assessment practices. Evidence-based scientific methods form the core of the work. 3) manage - for sustainability practices to be cost-effective requires that entities have the right information at the right time. Cosa tools & technologies help to improve management choices so that organizations can quickly apply the most sustainable practices that reduce environmental & economic vulnerability among farm communities. 4) share & disseminate - cosa advances a community of learning by making information & lessons available to farmers, rural organizations & the sustainability assessment community as a whole. This service is especially valuable in low resource countries where, for the first time, governments, companies, ngos, farmers, & researchers (the community) have a mutual & transparent way to share their understanding & advance the best economic, social, & environmental practices.

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 99% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.7%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $61.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • 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: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th 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: 12.4%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.47; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.8%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.7% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $189K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $958K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.