Rooted in Trees Ohio
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 933163392
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Kirtland, OH, USA
- Phone
- 2168134570
- Rating
- 61
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Environmental Beautification and Aesthetics
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $40,224
- Expenses
- $30,224
- Assets
- $13,127
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PAUL R ABBEY (FOUNDER/PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- PAUL R ABBEY (FOUNDER/PRESIDENT)
- CONSTANCE ABBEY (TREASURER/DIRECTOR)
- JOHN ANDRICA (VP/DIRECTOR)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Encourage understanding of roles trees have in the world, and to plant trees thereby creating more tree canopy in Northeast Ohio. This will be accomplished by providing trees to schools, community centers, YMCAs, municipalities, etc., and getting the trees planted and maintained.
What it reported doing in 2024
Expenses for specific tree canopy projects
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and 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: 31
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 59
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 28.1%; rating input score 28
- Program expense ratio: 37.5%; rating input score 37
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 24.9%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 152.8% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 123% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 28.1% of revenue deployed · 37.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 28/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 37/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.