ACT Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205961645
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Somerville, MA, USA
Phone
6175009990
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Energy Resources Conservation and Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,681,372
Expenses
$2,076,529
Assets
$480,467
Liabilities
$708,265

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Joseph Curtatone (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Joseph Curtatone (President): $320,339 total reported compensation
  • Alistair Pim (VP Advancement): $194,890 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

ACT Institute leads the just, equitable and rapid transition to a clean energy future and diverse climate economy.

What it reported doing in 2024

In ACT Institute's policy and government affairs initiatives, the institute leads planning and broad education and related efforts, while the council leads in legislative advocacy and related convenings. ACT Institute's combined policy efforts focus on advancing the northeast US's valuable markets in:- Grid modernization & 21st century electricity system (includingrate case initiatives)- Distributed clean energy resources, including solar, energystorage, efficiency, and building technologies.- Grid-scale renewables - Onshore wind, offshore wind, grid-scale solar- Climate & greenhouse gas markets- Northeast clean transportation solutions

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 72.8%; rating input score 73
  • 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: -23.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.23; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.47; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.9% of revenue deployed · 72.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $320K · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $2.1M reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.