Finch Green LLC

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
923858132
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
Phone
2063176160
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$136,556
Expenses
$125,075
Assets
$173,516
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • David Swartling (President)
  • Tom Croker (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • David Swartling (President)
  • Tom Croker (Vice President)
  • Deborah Rimkus (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Plan for and develop affordable housing on Bainbridge Island in collaboration with individuals and other charitable organizations.

What it reported doing in 2025

The principal purpose and business of the Company is to plan and mobilize support for an affordable housing community for the benefit of Bainbridge Island on property owned by Bethany Lutheran Church. The project was initiated in response to new state law (RCW 36.70A.545) and a City Ordinance passed in response to this new legislation (COBI Ordinance 2022-02). In 2023, the organization was created as a Washington limited liability company under the auspices of the 501(c)(3) status of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and its group tax exemption, and the new organization initiated a community-wide effort to effect necessary zoning changes and to develop relationships with Housing Resources Bainbridge (HRB) in order to navigate and pursue planning for the affordable housing community

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.6%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.4%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.39; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 78.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $125K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and related organizations
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.