Greater Greater Washington Commons

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
932551996
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2028884896
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$248,062
Expenses
$307,256
Assets
$377,905
Liabilities
$25,401

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Chelsea A Allinger (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Chelsea A Allinger (Executive Director): $129,555 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Greater Greater Washington Commons (GGWash Commons) aims to build civic capacity through media, education, and engagement, to advance racial, economic, and environmental justice in land use, transportation, and housing throughout Greater Washington.

What it reported doing in 2025

Our educational programming creates learning and skill-building opportunities to help elected and public officials make informed policy decisions and to help residents advocate effectively in their communities. Our engagement work fosters well-connected networks of residents and decision-makers alike, helping to build the movement for stronger communities. Our editorial work informs and educates people around the Washington region and world about the forces that shape our region and the people in it. The DC Transportation Equity Network (DC TEN) is a cross-sector coalition of direct-service and advocacy organizations committed to seeing a complete transportation system that ensures vulnerable residents are accounted for in the District of Columbia.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.4%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -23.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 54.5% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -83.3% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -24.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.4% of revenue deployed · 80.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $247K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $130K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.