Climate Collective

Legal name: Climate Collective Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
991585513
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, United States
Phone
2026397277
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$453,873
Expenses
$990,008
Assets
$681,980
Liabilities
$2,612

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANNA LERNER NESBITT (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANNA LERNER NESBITT (CEO): $315,750 total reported compensation
  • JONATHAN RYAN NESBITT (CFO & TREASURER): $124,140 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Making technology work for climate and nature.

What it reported doing in 2025

From hosting public conversations and educational opportunities to providing support to organizations and individuals, climate collective is dedicated to advancing the role of technology for a more sustainable world. Programming and public outreach: climate collective provides programming, which involves, among others, monthly learning calls, office hours, and releasing weekly newsletters. The goal of programming activities is to increase awareness on how digital technology (for example, ai) can be a valuable tool in meeting conservation and sustainability goals: if more organizations and environmental groups were aware of technology as a tool, they could deploy it in their own work and increase positive outcomes.

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 88% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 74.2%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • 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: 55.6%; rating input score 56; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -118.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -91.9% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -56.2% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 74.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $734K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $316K · 5 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $108K reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 56/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.