Community Sustainability Partners Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 934325766
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Brooklyn, NY, USA
- Phone
- 6463590395
- Rating
- 61
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $924,900
- Expenses
- $672,194
- Assets
- $321,898
- Liabilities
- $66,646
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ESTHER TOPOROVSKY (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- ESTHER TOPOROVSKY (PRESIDENT): $44,922 total reported compensation
- JARED LANG (TREASURER): $20,000 total reported compensation
- KATHLEEN BERUBE (SECRETARY): $20,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Community sustainability partners (csp)'s mission is to incorporate community development into the clean energy transition. Csp provides advisory, strategy, and direct implementation support to community lenders, public agencies, and affordable housing developers.
What it reported doing in 2024
Csp provided direct technical assistance to approximately10 mission-driven lenders and affordable housing developers, including financial modeling, predevelopment planning, and guidance on leveraging public and private capital, helping partners equitable energy lending programs. It partnered with community development financial institutions (cdfis) to expand their energy lending capacity and deepen impact in under-resourced communities. Csp conducted customized workshops, shared underwriting tools, and offered individualized coaching to support more inclusive, climate-aligned investment strategies. In collaboration with local and state public agencies, csp contributed to the design and implementation of energy programs that promote affordable housing, energy efficiency, and economic resilience. The organization provided policy guidance, stakeholder engagement strategies, and technical input to ensure these initiatives addressed the needs of both developers and the communities they serve.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 64% 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 and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 67
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 18
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 60.8%; rating input score 61
- Program expense ratio: 83.7%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $12.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 27.3%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.6%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 60.8% of revenue deployed · 83.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $562K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $45K · 3 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $104K reported
- Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 1 filing year from 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
- 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.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.