Future of Plastics Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203492339
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2029745200
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Engineering and Technology

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,500
Expenses
$2,725
Assets
$13,700
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHEW SEAHOLM (CHAIR): $619,419 total reported compensation
  • GLENN ANDERSON (SECRETARY): $417,284 total reported compensation
  • WAYNE POPHAM (TREASURER): $360,422 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 future of plastics foundation empowers a sustainable and thriving plastics industry through education, community engagement, and innovation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Through education, community engagement, and cutting-edge innovation, the future of plastics foundation will: fuel innovation by investing in a future-ready workforce, funding groundbreaking research and development, and supporting similar initiatives that foster a sustainable plastics future. Cultivate a generation of prepared, informed, professional leaders who champion the responsible use, development, and circularity of plastics and endeavor to attract and train the plastics manufacturing experts of tomorrow. Drive positive environmental impact by collaborating with communities to promote sustainability and positive environmental change.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 16
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.03; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3,888.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.1% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $619K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.