Greenroots Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812718273
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chelsea, MA, USA
Phone
6174663076
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,315,910
Expenses
$4,143,913
Assets
$12,576,223
Liabilities
$356,836

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROSEANN BONGIOVANNI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROSEANN BONGIOVANNI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $150,359 total reported compensation
  • YARITZA MORALES-GONZALEZ (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $118,591 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Greenroots works to achieve environmental justice and greater quality of life through collective action, unity, education and youth leadership across neighborhoods and communities. We do so through deep community engagement and empowerment, youth leadership and implementation of innovative projects and campaigns.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule oclimate justice, waterfront revitalization and energy democracyin order to address the serious environmental and climate impacts facing the frontline communities of chelsea and east boston, greenroots engages residents of these two cities to implement innovative campaigns to: develop waterfront access; address urban heat island, flooding and sea-level rise; increase green space and tree canopy cover; and work towards energy democracy and resilience. Some of our present campaigns and projects include acquiring and revitalizing the forbes site; implementing the cool block; fostering the tree keepers program and caminatas verdes; increasing access and ecological restoration to the mill creek, chelsea creek and island end river; advancing a community-owned energy microgrid; increasing literacy around energy bills and advancing initiatives to help chelsea and east boston rate-payers save money while being more energy efficient.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.7%; rating input score 96; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.03; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31.3% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $199K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.