The Green-wood Historic Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113450678
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
7187887850
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,818,768
Expenses
$3,887,711
Assets
$2,672,210
Liabilities
$922,809

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

Leadership & pay

39 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD J MOYLAN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RICHARD J MOYLAN (PRESIDENT): $682,698 total reported compensation
  • ARLENE BASCOM (VP & COMPTROLLER THRU DEC 2024): $288,355 total reported compensation
  • LISA ALPERT (VP. DEVELOPMENT): $245,370 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Green-wood is a living cemetery that brings people closer to the world as it is and was, by memorializing the dead and bringing to life the art, history, and natural beauty of New York city.

What it reported doing in 2024

Institutional archives and the historic collection: green-wood's seeks to share these unique resources with scholars, researchers, and the public to enhance knowledge of the cemetery, those interred here, and 19th- and 20th century history. Green-wood's institutional archives comprise 3,200 cubic feet of meticulously preserved records, relating to this history of the cemetery itself and the burial records of over half a million individuals (570,000+ in total) interred at green-wood. An extensive project to transcribe 60 burial ledgers (1840 to 1937) and make them searchable online was completed in 2023 with the support of the national endowment for the humanities.green-wood's diverse historic collection is composed of items ranging from cabinet cards to stereo view photographs to oil paintings to 19th-century baseball programs. Every item is historically significant to green-wood, relating either to a green-wood cemetery "permanent resident or to the history of this national historic landmark, founded in 1838.other programs include genealogy and restoration & preservation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.2%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 74.4%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 99.6%; rating input score 100; 39th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.8%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.2% of revenue deployed · 74.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 26 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $683K · 39 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.