Climate Arc

Legal name: Climate Arc Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
932684544
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
London, DE, United Kingdom
Phone
9042249917
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$44,432,743
Expenses
$22,985,689
Assets
$30,450,458
Liabilities
$6,401,850

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MERYAM OMI (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • MERYAM OMI (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $474,658 total reported compensation
  • BEATE VAN LOO- BORN (FORMER CCO): $335,241 total reported compensation
  • FELIX Preston (Director of Research & Program): $291,078 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Arc is an independent, philanthropically funded organisation created to bridge the gap between climate ambition and financing action.

What it reported doing in 2024

Partnerships and Impact - Covers the Grant making Program, which funds projects developing climate-finance tools, datasets, and methodologies (e.g., PACTA 2.0, Lobby Map, Resilient Planet Data Hub), and the Climate Finance Hub Brazil, a localized coalition focused on upskilling the Brazilian financial community and producing in-depth corporate climate-transition analysis.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.6%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $85.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 48.3%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 177.8% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 168.5% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 42.6% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $18.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $475K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.7M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.