Alliance for Affordable Energy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
721057834
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New Orleans, LA, USA
Phone
5042089761
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Energy Resources Conservation and Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,593,131
Expenses
$1,405,409
Assets
$2,470,881
Liabilities
$57,084

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Logan Atkinson Burke (Executive Director)
  • Samuel Wilcher (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Logan Atkinson Burke (Executive Director): $104,700 total reported compensation
  • Letha Ratliff (Operations Director): $84,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To advocate for fair, affordable and environmentally responsible energy policies.

What it reported doing in 2024

Consumer Protection: The Alliance is the only dedicated consumer advocate in Louisiana for energy utility customers. We monitor regulatory proceedings at both of Louisianas utility regulatory bodies: New Orleans City Council and the Louisiana Public Service Commission and intervene on behalf of residential ratepayers. The Alliance holds electric and gas utilities, and their regulators accountable. We work to limit unfair costs that would otherwise be passed along to ratepayers on their energy bills. Through organizing, education, and research, The Alliance looks for regulatory and policy solutions to Louisianas biggest problems. We also aim to educate consumers on their rights and the true cost of energy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.4%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $53.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th 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: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.8%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.76; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.4% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.