The Green Door Initiative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273467703
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Detroit, MI, USA
Phone
3139228055
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,512,182
Expenses
$2,004,626
Assets
$1,001,012
Liabilities
$584,021

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Donele Wilkins (Executive Director)
  • Brian Flaggs (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Donele Wilkins (Executive Director): $150,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ensure that everyone is environmentally literate and capable of promoting a sustainable lifestyle. We provide job training, youth development and awareness.

What it reported doing in 2024

Workforce: This training initiative delivers comprehensivve, industry- relevant instruction desiged to equip participants with the skills and certifications needed to secure employment in environmental remediation and restoration, construction, hazardous materials and waste handling, and emergency response. Over the past year, the program successfully trained 83 workers, achieving an impressive 92% job placement rate. By combining technical instruction, hands-on experience, and career readiness support, the program ensures that graduates are prepared to meet the demands of high-growth sectors while contributing to safer, healthier, and more sustainable communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.7%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 51.1%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: $48.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -32.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.5%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.5% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.9% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.7% of revenue deployed · 51.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.