Minnesota Brownfields

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205007655
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
9529284658
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$211,112
Expenses
$248,321
Assets
$234,433
Liabilities
$304,707

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELIZABETH SCHMIESING (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CHARLIE VANDER AARDE (BOARD CHAIR)
  • ELIZABETH SCHMIESING (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • MIKE WARDWELL (CHAIR OF THE RESCAPE COMMI)

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

The mission of Minnesota brownfields is to promote, through education, research and partnerships, the efficient cleanup and reuse of contaminated land as a means of generating economic growth, strengthening communities and enabling sustainable land use development.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hosted forums and education programs on brownfield redevelopment including an epa brownfield grant lunch and learn, tour of a brownfields site, grant writing workshop, mpca guidance event, emerging developers workshop and the state of brownfields event. These events were held in person.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 27
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 32.2%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 27.5%; rating input score 27
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.6%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.94; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.3; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -45.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -18.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 32.2% of revenue deployed · 27.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $68K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.