Climate Power
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 922307261
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2029643737
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Pollution Abatement and Control Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $79,404,156
- Expenses
- $88,298,306
- Assets
- $1,449,137
- Liabilities
- $596,559
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LORI LODES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- LORI LODES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $335,773 total reported compensation
- NZINGA WEST (PRES. & CHIEF OF PEOPLE & CULTURE): $283,859 total reported compensation
- HEATHER HARGREAVES (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIR., CAMPAIGNS): $274,986 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Climate power is working to ensure political, social, and economic progress on climate by winning the politics of climate.
What it reported doing in 2024
Education and advocacy: climate power promotes climate action and educates the public about the need for climate progress and the benefits of clean energy by engaging in three types of programming: (i) driving a national narrative about the importance of clean energy investments to supercharge our economy, (ii) engaging key communities of people who can be motivated to act for climate progress, who experience climate impacts in their daily lives, or who are regularly exposed to disinformation about climate change, and (iii) blocking efforts by those seeking to derail climate action and the clean energy economy.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 97
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 23
- Sustainability: 14
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 96.3%; rating input score 96
- Fundraising efficiency: $98.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -11.2%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 111% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 76.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -152% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $85M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $336K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $16.9M reported
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 46 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 34 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.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.