Energy Share of Montana Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810411562
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Helena, MT, USA
Phone
4064424900
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Expense Reduction Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,525,651
Expenses
$3,143,210
Assets
$15,543,301
Liabilities
$281,995

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Roxanne Klingensmith (President)
  • Brandy Powers (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Rachel Haberman (Executive Dir.): $130,097 total reported compensation
  • Jonathan Ballew (Executive Dir.): $9,809 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Montanans helping neighbors faced with energy emergencies maintaining their self-reliance. Energy Share of Montana provides energy assistance and help for Montana families for emergency heating needs through bill assistance, furnace and water heater safety and efficiency.

What it reported doing in 2024

Energy Share of Montanas primary focus is emergency bill assistance: helping Montanans who face no-heat situations in their homes and have no resources to pay the bills themselves. Applications are reviewed on an individual basis, and applicants are asked to explain their circumstances leading to their need for assistance. In most cases households are helped not more than once every five years or up to $1,400 in assistance unless the household is at or below 125% of poverty and they are then eligible for up to $2,000 in assistance every 5 years. Energy Share of Montana uses private donations and universal systems benefits (USB) funds to fund emergency bill assistance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 92% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 95.6%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 42nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 10.8%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.95; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.5%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.9% of revenue deployed · 95.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $130K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 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.

  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.