Citizens Against Heartland Greenwashing Projects

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
883782918
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Colchester, IL, USA
Phone
2178259690
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$29,122
Expenses
$14,962
Assets
$73,824
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kathleen Campbell (president)
  • Susan Young (vice president)

People named in this filing

  • Kathleen Campbell (president)
  • Susan Young (vice president)
  • Marilyn Shelley (secretary)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Represent land owners to intervene and participate primarily in regulatory proceedings related to approval and regulation of carbon dioxide capture sources, pipelines, and/or sequestration sites, and also in other related activities related to governmental actions, and/or CCS/CCUS legislation that would protect Illinois landowners.

What it reported doing in 2025

Citizens Against Heartland Greenwashing Projects conducted a major public education campaign at the Farm Progress Show explaining the problems with the use of eminent domain for CO2 pipelines.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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 - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.9%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 48.6%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.93; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -55.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -42.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.9% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.