Geothermal Rising

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942714326
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Palm Springs, CA, USA
Phone
5307582360
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
General Science

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,338,973
Expenses
$4,255,669
Assets
$3,458,106
Liabilities
$1,222,407

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRYANT JONES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JERICHO REYES (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KELLY BLAKE (PRESIDENT (THRU 02/2024))

Highest reported compensation

  • BRYANT JONES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $208,016 total reported compensation
  • KERRY FELLERS (DIRECTOR OF MEMBERSHIP): $166,542 total reported compensation
  • ANINE PEDERSEN (DIR OF SCIENCE & EXT. AFFAIRS): $162,006 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To connect the geothermal community and champion geothermal energy in the united states and around the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Educational courses, contracts and publications - various courses and projects pertaining to geothermal energy, including a geothermal video, on-line library, int'l education and various educational workshops.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 68% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 71.1%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.9%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.6%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79% of revenue deployed · 71.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $208K · 22 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $897K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.