Greater Stonington Realty Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473845814
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Pawcatuck, CT, USA
Phone
8605992600
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,780
Expenses
$182,632
Assets
$632,687
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kathleen Careb (President)
  • Danielle Chesebrough (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Kathleen Careb (President)
  • Danielle Chesebrough (Vice President)
  • Hannah Cedermark (Treasurer)

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

The mission is to promote and educate affordable housing available to individuals and families in the geographic area located around Stonington, Connecticut. The specific purpose of the Corporation is to develop, redevelop, manage, sponsor, own, and expand the availability of affordable housing for very low and moderate income individuals and families in the greater Stonington area. In furtherance of its purpose, the Corporation may build, acquire, renovate, rehabilitate, and revitalize structures to be occupied by very low, low, and moderate income individuals and families in the area served by the Corporation on its own or in collaboration with other organizations, public and private.

What it reported doing in 2025

Implement land development projects for Stonington Housing Authority

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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

STRONG - 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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -1,980.1%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.46; rating input score 46; 46th 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: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $183K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $103K reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.