Green City Force Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
800428040
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
6466814704
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,731,882
Expenses
$6,260,924
Assets
$4,037,970
Liabilities
$1,703,230

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TONYA GAYLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TONYA GAYLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $190,346 total reported compensation
  • CAROLYN ANTONIO (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $167,744 total reported compensation
  • ANNEL CABRERA-MARUS (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER): $133,418 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Train young leaders to power a green and inclusive economy, through serrvice.

What it reported doing in 2024

Career services: gcf is committed to supporting alumni of its service corps as they transition into full-time work or school following service. This includes aims to position frontline community members as competitive and qualified candidates for emerging employment opportunities via pre-apprenticeships and on the job training, as well as advanced training and career paths over time. Career tracks include construction, solar, electrification, weatherization, urban

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.7%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: 9 of 9 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: 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: 7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.4%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.7% of revenue deployed · 81.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $190K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 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: 9 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.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.