Green Again Restoration

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
833651734
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6123822592
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Quality, Protection, and Beautification N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$129,986
Expenses
$106,876
Assets
$259,731
Liabilities
$654

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHERINE SANGOTRA HILL (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • REBECCA MONTGOMERY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JANE HOWARD (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DONALD MATTHEW HILL (CHIEF STRATEGY OFFICER): $6,721 total reported compensation
  • CATHERINE SANGOTRA HILL (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $4,941 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To collaborate with the people of madagascar to develop & share robust scientific strategies for rainforest restoration & protection, in order to conserve the unique tropical biodiversity & support traditional livelihoods of rural people.

What it reported doing in 2025

Eco school and greenhouse facility support continued. The school educates Malagascy communities on planting and caring for trees in a manner that will allow them to survive hurricanes & wildfires. This is also the center of scientific research which will be shared with tree planting organizations around the world and educates residents in scientific processes and tools. The ultimate goal is to build capacity for sustainable forest management thru eco education and scientific study.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.5%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 97.6%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.8%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.43; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.9%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.5% of revenue deployed · 97.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $104K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $7K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.