Hbcu Green Fund Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 475650301
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
- Location
- Forest Park, GA, USA
- Phone
- 6786126497
- Rating
- 23
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Management & Technical Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $588,787
- Expenses
- $996,453
- Assets
- $415,749
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- FELICIA DAVIS (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $100,520 total reported compensation
- MYRON WILLIAMS (SENIOR ADVISOR): $50,421 total reported compensation
- CAROL HUNTER (DIRECTOR): $38,755 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To advance the sustainability of historically black colleges and universities. Mission for hbcu's to serve as models of sustainability, promoting social, economic and environmental justice.
What it reported doing in 2024
The hbcu green funds accomplishments include advancing campus sustainability through programs like the hbcu green report and faculty development, fostering climate justice advocacy via a yearlong fellows program and international trips to senegal, launching initiatives like the west atlanta green initiative and green fest and advocating for equitable climate financing at global conferences through their african network. Hbcu has partnered with intentional endowment network to promote sustainable investments and connect with community groups to advance sustainable agriculture, exemplified by their work with truly living well farm.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
REVIEW - Revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 44
- Accountability: 31
- Sustainability: 19
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: Limited
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -69.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 25%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 35.3% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 49.5% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $101K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 10 of 13 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and grants
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.