Advanced Energy Economy Ohio Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 454907387
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990 2014
- Location
- Columbus, OH, USA
- Phone
- 6142270180
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Energy Resources Conservation and Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $587,333
- Expenses
- $526,736
- Assets
- $246,868
- Liabilities
- $127,448
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TED FORD (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- TED FORD (PRESIDENT & CEO): $147,802 total reported compensation
- MICHELLE MURCIA (COO/TREASURER OF BOARD): $53,063 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of advanced energy economy Ohio institute, aeeo's charitable and educational affiliate, is to raise awareness of the public benefits and opportunities of advanced energy. Aeeoi carries out its mission in a number of ways, both directly and through products and services it creates that are made available to the general public through aeeo.
What it reported doing in 2014
Aee Ohio institute led the completion of a state-wide roadmap in the energy efficiency sector to address the questions: what energy efficiency technologies and products are people making and commercializing around the world? How does Ohio participate in the energy efficiency industry today? What, if anything, should be Ohio's energy efficiency focus to drive its economy forward?
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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 38
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 62
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 38.4%; rating input score 38
- Program expense ratio: 42.8%; rating input score 43
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.3%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.52; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 38.1%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -15.6% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 38.4% of revenue deployed · 42.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $225K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $148K · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 43/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.