Greenspace NCR

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522141752
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025445336
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing, Shelter N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$60,983
Expenses
$49,782
Assets
$12,412
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Patricia Rose (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Nina Albert (Chair)
  • Matt Hoffman (Treasurer)
  • Christopher VanArsdale (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Greenspace works to make affordable housing and its neighborhoods green. Greenspace's major program is with Washington dc's department general services sustainability and energy division where we developed a strategic plan and program design and organizational review and support efforts.

What it reported doing in 2017

Greenspace, NCR, major program was the continued design and management of Washington, DC's District Department of Energy and Environment's (DOEE) Smarter DC Challenge, to transform DC businesses, organizations and institutions into innovative sustainability stewards who grow the economy, preserve resources and serve as leaders in the global marketplace. Participants grew from 15 to 428, over 108 million square feet affected, trained 34 sustainability leaders and significant numbers of education and training events, publications and tools.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 18.4%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.7% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -45.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -70.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $50K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 to 2017
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.