Georgia Appleseed Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 204036923
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Atlanta, GA, USA
- Phone
- 6784264640
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,520,989
- Expenses
- $1,471,592
- Assets
- $3,445,841
- Liabilities
- $26,777
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
26 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- RICHARD M WALLER (Executive Dir.): $156,208 total reported compensation
- KATHERINE SWETT (DIR OF OPER): $118,872 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of Georgia Appleseed is to keep children in school and on a path to success by providing legal services and representation, leading law and policy reform, growing a statewide community of advocates, and collaborating with children, youth, and their families.
What it reported doing in 2024
Program Service 1: School Justice (Systems Change): Georgia Appleseed works to dismantle the school-to-prison pipeline through systems change that helps schools keep students in class, supported, and learning. We focus on school climate, access to school-based behavioral health supports, fair discipline practices, and reducing barriers that contribute to chronic absenteeismespecially for students in poverty, with disabilities, or otherwise facing discrimination or instability.Key activities and achievements:-Supported improvements in state and agency policies affecting school safety, student supports, attendance, and school climate.-Trained 1,100+ parents, educators, and youth-serving professionals to advocate effectively for children.-Convened and facilitated the Georgia Education Climate Coalition to align partners and advance shared solutions for student wellbeing and learning conditions.-Produced and disseminated multilingual guidance and toolkits to improve access to student supports and best practices.-Since our targeted school justice efforts began in 2010, there have been an estimated ~400,000 fewer out-ofschool suspensions associated with these efforts.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 52
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 78.7%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 79.9%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.2%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.34; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 20.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 78.7% of revenue deployed · 79.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $156K · 26 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.