Sustainable Ct Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
824894473
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Bozrah, CT, USA
Phone
8602594767
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,826,602
Expenses
$1,111,547
Assets
$2,960,003
Liabilities
$64,877

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JESSICA LECLAIR (EXECUTIVE DI): $122,596 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To inspire, support, and certify sustainability actions by Connecticut towns and cities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Sustainable ct provides Connecticut municipalities with: a menu of coordinated, voluntary actions, to continually become more sustainable; resources and tools to assist municipalities in implementing sustainability actions and advancing thier programs for the benefit of all residents; and opportunities for certification to recognize municipalities for their ongoing sustainability achievements. As of december 2025, 139 municipalities (comprising over 91% of the state's population) were registered for sustainable ct, 95 municipalities had earned bronze, silver, or gold certifications (representing nearly 60% of the state's municipalities), and 23 municipalities had earned the climate leader designation on top of standard certification. Collectively, these communities have successfully implemented solutions that build thriving local economies, inclusive and equitable community connections, healthy and diverse housing options, clean transportation systems, vibrant and creative cultural ecosystems, efficient and resilient infrastructure, well-stewarded land and natural resources, forward-thinking land use practices, and inclusive public services. Registered and certified communities reflect the geographic, economic, and demographic range of Connecticut, including the state's largest cities (populations greater than 100,000) and smallest towns (populations less than 1,500) and municipalities in every county.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.3%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 64.5%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $34.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 60.6%; rating input score 61; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39.1%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.66; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.3% of revenue deployed · 64.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $717K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $123K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 21 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 17 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 39/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.