Greensboro Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300796097
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Greensboro, VT, USA
Phone
8025358090
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$227,727
Expenses
$106,708
Assets
$824,478
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHY IRWIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NAOMI RANZ-SCHLEIFER (PRESIDENT)
  • KEN CONNOLLY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JULIE PORAZZO (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CATHY IRWIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NAOMI RANZ-SCHLEIFER (PRESIDENT)
  • MEAGHAN MEACHEM (SECRETARY)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to advance initiatives that connect and enhance our greater greensboro community, protect our lakes and environment, and support a vibrant local economy.

What it reported doing in 2024

Lake and environmental stewardship - the association works with the local community to steward lakes and natural environment. Members volunteer their time to maintain caspian beach; participate in tree planting to improve riparian buffers along streams, essential for flood mitigation and water filtration; educate visitors on water quality of caspian lake and its watershed; build a boat and watercraft decontamination project at caspian beach to protect against invasive species; and monitor caspian dam, lake levels and water quality.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.6%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $33.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 10.9%; rating input score 11; 38th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 53.1%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.73; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 35.5% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.6% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $86K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 11/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.