Common Ground Earth Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
921119074
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Bel Air, MD, USA
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Quality, Protection, and Beautification N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$85,788
Expenses
$44,936
Assets
$49,989

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mark Magness (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Mark Magness (Executive Director)
  • Art Garcia (Director)
  • Brian Magness (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promoting the interconnectedness of the three pillars of sustainability - people planet and profit - and how all three thrive when nature-based solutions are considered in personal community and business endeavors.

What it reported doing in 2025

Clarksburg Church partnered with CGE through two grants to engage the community with nature at the Church and provide ecological benefits. Two meadows will be installed and CGE will be hosting web based information page and attending on site Farmers Market monthly and developing a student volunteer program to assist in adaptive management. Additionally Asbury Methodist Village partnered with CGE through a grant awarded to Asbury by Chesapeake Bay Trust to convert 1.6 acres to meadowland to engage residents with nature at the Village and provide ecological benefits. The 1000 residents 700 staff visitors and 100s of residents of the surrounding Gaithersburg communities primarily minority and low income benefit every day.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.3%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 78.8%; rating input score 79

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 47.6%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.11; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.3% of revenue deployed · 78.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $35K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.