Arizonans for a Clean Economy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
923664411
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6025254889
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,168,735
Expenses
$746,020
Assets
$477,199
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Charles Fisher (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Val Berechet (Board Chair)
  • Miguel Medrano (Board Secretary Treasurer)
  • Bob Burns (Board Member)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Arizonans for a Clean Economy is a coalition of residents and businesses who believe Arizona should lead the nation in energy independence. We educate Arizonans about the benefits of homegrown energy, mobilize supporters to advocate for clean energy development, and build durable public support for energy sources that save water and create choices for Arizonans.

What it reported doing in 2024

We educated the public about the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC), our state's public utility regulator. Our primary education campaign centered on informing Arizonans about the power the ACC has to set monthly utility rates and determine our state's energy rules and policies. The included both paid media strategies - short videos on social media and streaming radio ads - and a community outreach program. We also conducted research to determine the most effective messengers to deliver this information to a broad swath of Arizonans. Separately, we informed our supporters and the larger public about key decisions made by the commission that impacted current and prospective owners of rooftop solar systems. Both decisions enabled utilities to charge solar customers additional fees and pay less than fair market value for their excess energy. In both cases, we informed Arizonans about opportunities to share their thoughts with Commissioners during public comment periods and open meetings.

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 86% 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

MIXED - 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: 16
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 15.1%; rating input score 15
  • Program expense ratio: 23.6%; rating input score 24
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 36.2%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 169.2% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 159.7% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 15.1% of revenue deployed · 23.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $176K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 15/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.