Allied Climate Partners
Legal name: Allied Climate Partners Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 932878604
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2125542582
- Rating
- 56
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Management & Technical Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $66,539,772
- Expenses
- $2,411,788
- Assets
- $71,401,707
- Liabilities
- $289,931
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- AHMED SAEED (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- AHMED SAEED (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $696,929 total reported compensation
- SARAH FRANDSEN (PRINCIPAL): $182,290 total reported compensation
- CHIN-TING JENNIFER JIAN (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & OPERATIONS): $79,004 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Accelerate impactful climate solutions in emerging markets.
What it reported doing in 2024
Allied climate partners (acp) seeks to address climate finance challenges in emerging markets and developing economies by providing early-stage-focused investment platforms and others focused on critical climate-related bottlenecks with appropriate risk-oriented capital and a mandate to invest in climate-focused companies that lack access to capital and have significant potential to address the effects of climate change. The primary problems with catalyzing effective, long-lasting change when working to ameliorate the devastating effects of climate change are the lack of investment capital for potentially effective projects and a lack of managers and funds who are focused on prioritizing impact and climate resiliency over returns. Acp plans to address these problems by funding investment managers focused on raising and investing capital to address the financing gap at these early, risk-oriented stages of the project development process, when standard financing is difficult to come by. It will utilize capital strategically to leverage and stimulate additional market funding, and its investments will often be in junior, more catalytic tranches.
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 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 39
- Transparency & Controls: 54
- Accountability: 75
- Sustainability: 87
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 4.8%; rating input score 5
- Program expense ratio: 78.1%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $1,156.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 96.4%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 29.61; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 39.7%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 110.3% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 158% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 163.2% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 6 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 4.8% of revenue deployed · 78.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $697K · 9 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $393K reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 5/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.