E&co Inc Co Persistent Energy Ptr

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223319460
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
9172820526
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Affairs, Foreign Policy, & Globalization

Reported finances

Revenue
$32,177
Expenses
$438,960
Assets
$3,362,332
Liabilities
$194,541

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHANN PIETER VAN TUYLL (DIRECTOR & PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • GUY KERN MARTIN (CHAIR & SECRETARY)
  • JOHANN PIETER VAN TUYLL (DIRECTOR & PRESIDENT)
  • RUSSELL DIAMOND (DIRECTOR)

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

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

E+co's mission is to provide access to affordable cleaner energy in sub-saharan africa. It pursues this mission by investing in businesses in clean energy sectors, primarily in the area of solar power generation and distribution to households and businesses that are not connected to an electricity grid.

What it reported doing in 2014

E+co continued to assist clean energy businesses it has invested in: devergy, fenix international and persistent energy ghana (peg). All three companies provide clean, affordable energy services to off grid households and small businesses in africa: tanzania (devergy), uganda (fenix) and ghana (peg). E+co assisted these businesses by making debt investments in them at pre-commercial stages (i.e., before private investors were prepared to invest), to foster the development of these businesses to commercial scale. The success of all three businesses furthers e+co's mission of providing rural households and businesses the opportunity to replace their current consumption of expensive, unsafe and polluting kerosene and diesel fuel with solar-generated electricity at an affordable cost.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - 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: 24
  • Transparency & Controls: 46
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.1%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 12.7%; rating input score 13
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,264.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.66; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -26.4% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -47.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.1% of revenue deployed · 12.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $56K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $132K reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 35/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.