SUGi

Legal name: Sugi Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
842041713
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2020
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
7343557391
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$466,113
Expenses
$558,132
Assets
$122,700
Liabilities
$6,000

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELISE VAN MIDDELEM (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • TAMSIN SMITH (Director)
  • DAVID DE ROTHSCHILD (Director)
  • KEVIN HILL (EXCFO)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Greening Cities & Reimagining Urban Life. SUGi Pocket Forests build biodiversity, climate resilience and wellbeing in communities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Creation of forests in US and Brazil.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.2%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $46.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: -19.7%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 4 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 95.2% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $444K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.