Carbon Leadership Forum

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
934474427
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Bellevue, WA, USA
Phone
5102008560
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Pollution Abatement and Control Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,497,382
Expenses
$1,078,189
Assets
$1,626,475
Liabilities
$208,845

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANTHONY HICKLING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MEGHAN LEWIS (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $130,722 total reported compensation
  • ANTHONY HICKLING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $78,025 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Accelerates the transformation of the building sector to radically reduce the greenhouse gas emissions attributed to materials (also known as embodied carbon) used in buildings and infrastructure.

What it reported doing in 2024

The carbon leadership forum helped drive demand for low embodied carbon construction by helping set carbon targets for buildings and materials, researching carbon reduction pathways, and empowering key leaders to take action. Clf played a critical role in informing policies and private sector initiatives that help reduce the greenhouse gas emissions attributed to materials used in buildings and infrastructure. This included direct technical guidance and publication of key resources such as low-carbon policy case studies, model embodied carbon specifications, and low-carbon procurement fact sheets. Clf also convened a wide network of building industry practitioners, certification bodies, policymakers, and others to help streamline and scale embodied carbon reporting and reduction programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 32.1%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 74.4%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $48.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 56.8%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.51; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 32.1% of revenue deployed · 74.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $802K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $131K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.