GreenPath Financial Wellness
Legal name: Greenpath Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 386142925
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Farmington Hills, MI, US
- Phone
- 800-550-1961
- Rating
- 89
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Financial Counseling
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $46,929,170
- Expenses
- $45,085,156
- Assets
- $69,133,447
- Liabilities
- $19,879,892
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KRISTEN HOLT (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- KRISTEN HOLT (PRESIDENT & CEO): $519,626 total reported compensation
- DONNA MCNEILL (COO): $383,543 total reported compensation
- SIREESHA MANDAVA (CIO): $363,877 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We support the financial wellness of people across the U.S. We want to build a world where it’s easier to make healthy financial choices.
What it reported doing in 2024
Housing counseling: as a department of housing and urban development (hud) intermediary and housing counseling agency, greenpath provides mortgage/rent delinquency counseling, pre-purchase home buyer counseling and education, and reverse mortgage (hecm) counseling to people in all 50 states. In 2024, we provided these housing counseling services to about 40,000 households. Note: revenue from this activity is federally funded and, therefore, included under part viii (1) contributions and grants.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 81% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87.2%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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; 66th 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: 3.9%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.8%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 87.2% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $39.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $520K · 22 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.4M reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.