Friends of French Farm

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
451287152
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Greenwich, CT, USA
Phone
2033514275
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$-41,259
Expenses
$161,157
Assets
$2,225,743
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NATHAN R ALLEN III (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • NATHAN R ALLEN III (PRESIDENT): $14,625 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Preserve and maintain french farm, a registered historic property, as a 1910 working farm, and its gardens, horticultural and mineral collections for use in promoting historical, cultural and environmental awareness through school and community programs.

What it reported doing in 2017

Maintaining, preserving and operating french farm as a 1910 working farm, and maintaining and preserving the sculpture, mineral and horticultural collections and gardens for the community and school programs conducted at the farm. French farm was the first greenwich property to be listed in 1975 on the newly created national register of historic places. During the fiscal year, the farm established an internship program for a high school student to conduct an environmental research project on the farm (soil sampling / beekeeping). The program was a success, and friends of french farm is looking for opportunities to expand the program with other high schools. Students from greenwich country day worked on the farm as part of their community service program requirement.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -490.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.81; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.1%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -35.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -410.7% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.7% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $145K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $15K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 to 2017
  • 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.

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.