Friends of the Pittsburgh Urban Forest

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251778057
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4127818733
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Beautification and Aesthetics

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,490,219
Expenses
$3,938,447
Assets
$4,135,191
Liabilities
$394,023

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIELLE CRUMRINE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIELLE CRUMRINE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $122,560 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Tree pittsburgh is an environmental non-profit organization dedicated to strengthening and building community vitality by restoring and protecting the urban forest through tree planting and care, education, advocacy, and land conservation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Tree planting and care - tree pittsburgh works collaboratively with partners to facilitate the planting and care of both public and private trees across all city of pittsburgh neighborhoods and throughout allegheny county. In 2024, tree pittsburgh expanded its impact by becoming an affiliate of the giving grove, a national nonprofit that supports the establishment of community fruit orchards, increasing access to fresh food and strengthening community stewardship. Tree pittsburgh engages local residents and volunteers from universities, corporations, and civic groups in hands-on tree care activities, including mulching, weeding, watering, and pruning. The organization also raises funds and manages contracts for the professional care of large, mature public trees and employs seasonal crews to maintain and improve the region's urban forest.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.6%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 78.4%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $54.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.3%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.6% of revenue deployed · 78.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $123K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.