Viridiant

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263983513
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Henrico, VA, USA
Phone
8042259843
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Pollution Abatement and Control Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,911,828
Expenses
$2,581,760
Assets
$3,129,393
Liabilities
$90,627

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew Green (Executive Director)
  • Bettina Bergoo (Vice President)
  • Nathan Blinn (President)
  • Katherine C Beile (Former Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Andrew Green (Executive Director): $100,585 total reported compensation
  • Katherine C Beile (Former Executive Director): $52,211 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Advancing sustainable, affordable, and energy efficient construction through education and technical support.

What it reported doing in 2024

For nearly 20 years, Viridiant and its partners have delivered green building certification programs, helping more than 45,000 individuals and families live in sustainable, affordable homes while advancing energy-efficient, high-performance construction across the region. Each year, Viridiant provides education and technical support throughout the designbuild process, working with builders, developers, nonprofits, and housing authorities to make sustainable, energy-efficient construction achievable and cost-effective. This partnership ensures residents enjoy healthier, lower-cost homes and supports the creation of more vibrant, durable communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -35%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.21; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $101K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.