Treepeople Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237314838
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Beverly Hills, CA, USA
Phone
8187534600
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,044,956
Expenses
$16,302,532
Assets
$19,591,444
Liabilities
$4,093,512

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL BERGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIEL BERGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $193,045 total reported compensation
  • AUTUMN TORREGANO (SENIOR DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES): $164,686 total reported compensation
  • MARCOS TRINIDAD (SENIOR DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS): $152,511 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Treepeople unites the power of trees, people, and nature-based solutions to grow more climate-resilient and water-secure communities as the region faces extreme weather, historic drought and a hotter, drier future. The organization inspires, engages and supports people to take personal responsibility for the urban environment making it safe, healthy, fun and sustainable and to share the process as a model for the world. Treepeople facilitates collaboration among public agencies and local stakeholders, and promotes leadership in grassroots volunteers, youth and communities. In this way, treepeople seeks to build a powerful and diverse coalition to grow a greener, healthier and more water-secure los angeles for present and future generations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Urban and mountain forestry: the forestry programs expanded tree canopy, cared for young trees, reforested mountainous areas, and restored native habitat while engaging and activating thousands of individuals to participate and learn in the process. Treepeople's urban forestry teams planted trees in historically underserved communities across los angeles county and into the inland empire. Treepeople's mountain forestry team restored numerous project sites across the local mountains that have burned in recent fires. Treepeople engaged more than 6,800 volunteers, planted more than 14,600 trees and plants in mountain forests, planted more than 3,300 trees in urban parkways, and distributed more than 3,200 fruit trees to residents. In addition, treepeople engaged and supported volunteers to ensure the survival of thousands of plants and trees across the region, including over 400 acres in the mountains. This program has directly contributed to the mitigation and adaptation of climate change, providing much-needed shade and eco-system benefits in our warming environment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.9%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 79.4%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.7%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.9% of revenue deployed · 79.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $12.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $193K · 31 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.7M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.