350 Bay Area

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472407547
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Santa Rosa, CA, USA
Phone
9252555341
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$558,429
Expenses
$446,156
Assets
$379,512
Liabilities
$824

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Laura Neish (Executive Director/Secretary)
  • Roopak Kandasamy (Vice President)
  • Jack Fleck (Board President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Laura Neish (Executive Director/Secretary): $87,791 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

350 Bay Area is a grassroots organization mobilizing communities to accelerate the end of the fossil fuel era and build a just, clean energy future.

What it reported doing in 2024

350 Bay Area's Clean Energy Program advocates an Advanced Community Energy Model for California to modernize and democratize energy generation and delivery. We seek a resilient and stable grid capable of providing all the renewable energy and storage necessary to reach California's climate goals. We support and protect Community Choice Energy (CCE) and Net Energy Metering (NEM) from challenges by the investor owned utilities. Nearly everyone in the Bay Area now receives their electricity from energy generation purchased by CCE's, rather than investor-owned utilities. We are recognized by the California Public Utilities Commission as a legal party in rule-makings related to roof-top solar incentives, microgrids, and other distributed energy resources. We also consult with legislators and other non-profits to promote local, decentralized resiliency, to support CCEs and more socially equitable ways of reaching 100% renewable energy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.1%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 71.1%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.1%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.85; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 57.1% of revenue deployed · 71.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $317K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $88K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.