Franklin County Community Land Trust Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882605254
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Greenfield, MA, USA
Phone
9155258907
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,840
Expenses
$31,224
Assets
$56,484
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Judith Atkins (President)

People named in this filing

  • Judith Atkins (President)
  • Martin Omasta (Treasurer)
  • David Cohen (Clerk)

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

To own, lease, rent, manage, sell real property (through acquisition, rehabilitation, new construction, or otherwise) in order to make housing available at the lowest possible cost to low-income persons and families in Franklin County, Massachusetts.

What it reported doing in 2025

As a learning organization, FCCLT has given significant time to developing a regional collaborative of similar CLTs and other reinforcing affordable housing groups within the 3 county area - VALE. Valley Alliance for Land Equity (VALE) serves as a information and resource sharing group that seeks to increase the effectiveness of each of our missions through mutual support. FCCLT operates as the fiscal sponsor for VALE while this group-of-groups establishes internal protocols and continues to build external support. VALE's mission is to scale up the availability of permanently affordable, democratically-governed, shared-equity opportunities for land and housing in Franklin, Hampshire, and Hampden counties. We seek to meaningfully reduce the racialized wealth divide in Western Massachusetts and better meet individual and community needs. This collaborative is allowing FCCLT and other area CLTs to draw on the decades of expertise of the various member groups, build relationships with mission friendly developers and real estate designers, create channels for combined statewide housing initiatives, develop shared paperwork and administrative functions to reduce burden on isolated rural communities seeking to form local area CLTs, advertise the benefits of community owned property to our neighbors to make it part of the regular conversation of housing, and to find ways to be an entity that can say YES to donations of property with structures - which currently does not exist in the River Valley.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 53% for direct work, and 47% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 73.2%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th 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: 93%; rating input score 93; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -356.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.81; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -80.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -180.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -34.7% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 73.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $23K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.