Tree Eastie Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 922143936
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Boston, MA, USA
- Phone
- 9788095456
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Environmental Beautification and Aesthetics
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $165,223
- Expenses
- $149,130
- Assets
- $105,082
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
1 person listed
Executive titles in this filing
- William P Masterson (Founder and Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- William P Masterson (Founder and Executive 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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Environmental Justice
What it reported doing in 2025
Launched a program for residents to receive free fruit trees and learn how to successfully grow their own fruit trees. This was done through a series of instructional workshops. We also performed maintenance to an orchard on city owned property and enlisted stewards to care for the trees. We distributed the fruit harvested back into the community. We planted over 50 fruit trees with over 150 residents participating in the program which benefited over 500 individuals.
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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 78.5%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 87%; rating input score 87
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: 9.7%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.7; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 62.4% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 39.1% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 49% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 78.5% of revenue deployed · 87% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $130K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.