The Resiliency Company
Legal name: Durable Capital for Sustainable Outcomes Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 990468956
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, United States
- Phone
- 2028106818
- Rating
- 51
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public, Society Benefit N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $27,461,203
- Expenses
- $2,420,846
- Assets
- $25,357,393
- Liabilities
- $317,036
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ABIGAIL ROSS (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ABIGAIL ROSS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $386,713 total reported compensation
- STEPHANIE GOLDFINE (SECRETARY AND GENERAL COUNSEL): $300,933 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Resiliency Company’s mission is to make resiliency the norm for physical infrastructure in the United States, so communities can thrive amidst the changed and changing weather and extreme climate events. Durable Capital for Sustainable Outcomes, a DE nonprofit corporation, DBA The Resiliency Company © 2025 _EIN # 99-0468956_ . For the past year, we’ve been operationalizing **the Resilient Delta Fund**. Why? To be disaster-resilient and insurable, most homes need to exceed the minimum standards required by building codes. But building ‘above code’ is not typically covered by financing even though resilience measures make properties better assets. We call this gap the ‘resiliency delta’, and the Fund was created to test, refine and scale a new financial product that the financial sector could provide. Read More Where resilience has scaled.
What it reported doing in 2024
The resiliency company is a parent organization that mobilizes the funding, policies, and innovation required to decrease the financial impact of climate disasters and hazards. We're not a think tank; we're a do tank. Our approach is to encourage organizations and experts at the intersection of climate science, adaptation, finance, and policy to come together to ensure our country's infrastructure is resilient to disasters and hazards.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Affiliate-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 51% for direct work, and 49% for grants.
The verdict
MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 6
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 85
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 1.5%; rating input score 1
- Program expense ratio: 16.8%; rating input score 17
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 91.2%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.47; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.9%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 1.5% of revenue deployed · 16.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $408K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $387K · 5 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $283K reported
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 1/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 17/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.