Fenway Forward
Legal name: Fenway Community Trust
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 222745097
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Boston, MA, USA
- Phone
- 617-267-4637
- Rating
- 39
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Development, Construction, Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,560
- Expenses
- $2,037
- Assets
- $49,249
- Liabilities
- $29,654
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- GREG PAULSON HAIG (PRESIDENT (UNTIL 5/24))
- SARAH JENNESS (PRESIDENT (AS OF 5/24))
People named in this filing
- NIKKI FLIONIS (DIRECTOR (UNTIL 5/24))
- GREG PAULSON HAIG (PRESIDENT (UNTIL 5/24))
- TIMOTHY COAKLEY (TREASURER)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Fenway Forward (formerly Fenway CDC) works to build a vibrant, inclusive Fenway neighborhood by creating affordable housing, advancing workforce development, providing resident services, and organizing the community to ensure its voice is heard in decisions that shape the neighborhood.
What it reported doing in 2024
Fct provides housing to low income individuals in the fenway area of boston, Massachusetts.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 81
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 68.9%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.18; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.6; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -28.8% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -21.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 14 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.