Global Environment & Technology Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541489434
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Arlington, VA, USA
Phone
7033792713
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,998,224
Expenses
$13,427,975
Assets
$11,950,072
Liabilities
$1,254,076

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MONICA D ELLIS (CEO)
  • ALEXANDRA L SCOTT (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MONICA D ELLIS (CEO): $580,494 total reported compensation
  • J SCOTT DENLINGER (CFO): $334,428 total reported compensation
  • ALEXANDRA L SCOTT (PRESIDENT): $316,549 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 foundation's mission is to be a leader in advancing sustainability by partnering business with governments and civil society to build thriving, resilient communities through innovative approaches and technologies. Through cross-cutting partnerships and multi-sector networks, the foundation strives to uplift communities through water access, sanitation and hygiene, health systems strengthening, entrepreneurship, women's empowerment, sustainable agriculture and climate resilience.

What it reported doing in 2024

Water security/sustainable initiativessee schedule 0 for complete description

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 56
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 25%; rating input score 25; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -22.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 4 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $11.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $580K · 6 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.1M reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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 25/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.