Open Space Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521053406
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2122908200
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,858,272
Expenses
$3,655,960
Assets
$23,289,878
Liabilities
$15,811,224

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

Leadership & pay

52 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRISTOPHER J ELLIMAN (PRESIDENT & CEO (OUTGOING 05/24))
  • DAVID KIERAN-KAUFMAN (VICE PRESIDENT AND ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL)
  • LARS KULLESEID (PRESIDENT & CEO (INCOMING 04/24))
  • MAY MAY CHENG (VICE PRESIDENT, CONTROLLER)
  • TALLY BLUMBERG (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TALLY BLUMBERG (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $403,844 total reported compensation
  • LARS KULLESEID (PRESIDENT & CEO (INCOMING 04/24)): $390,754 total reported compensation
  • NATHAN BERRY (CHIEF LAND, PROTECTION OFFICER): $383,415 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Osi protects land for clean drinking water, public recreation, healthy communities, and wildlife habitat; and to conserve intact forests and floodplains that capture and store carbon and protect against increasingly dangerous weather events.

What it reported doing in 2024

Through its supporting organization, the open space institute land trust (osilt), osi saves land to protect water sources; create and make public land more inviting for all; maintain healthy forests; mitigate the effects of extreme weather; provide wildlife habitat; and strengthen communities. Working across the eastern united states, osilt achieves these goals through facilitated large-scale conservation projects; direct acquisition and conservation easements; and grants and loans. In 2024, osilt protected 12,084 acres with a fair market value of $80.59 million and made 23 capital grants totaling $3.7 million, protecting 6,878 acres in seven states with a fair market value of $37.9 million. Further, osi directly approved eight grants for conservation planning totaling $109,275.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 97
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.8%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 60%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.4%; rating input score 98; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 46.7%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.37; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.68; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 177.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.8% of revenue deployed · 60% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $404K · 52 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.5M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 43 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 21 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.