Global Steel Climate Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920996680
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2024129483
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,006,333
Expenses
$836,264
Assets
$557,320
Liabilities
$640,783

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Adina Renee Adler (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Adina Renee Adler (Executive Director): $245,939 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The GSCC is an international organization of steel producers and other organizations who are committed to accurately measuring and significantly reducing the carbon intensity and emissions that result from the steelmaking process. The GSCC developed a new standard, known as the Steel Climate Standard. The GSCC is organized for the purposes of providing association services, namely, to promote the common business interests of its members (i.e., steel producers and manufacturers), promoting public awareness of the environmental impacts of steel production by means of public advocacy, and association services, namely, maintaining a membership organization for steel producers and manufacturers along with their business partners and stakeholders and promoting the interest of the members thereof.

What it reported doing in 2025

Advocacy with governments, NGOs, business partners and other stakeholders to promote the Standard as the preeminent framework for lowering carbon emissions in the steel industry. Activities include (a) working with parliamentary representatives and staff globally for recognition of the Standard in relevant legislation, (b) working with Executive agencies globally to establish support for the industry's decarbonization efforts, such as in policy and initiatives, (c) engaging with environmental NGOs to obtain their endorsement, and (d) promoting steel produced within the Standard to consumers making conscientious decisions through sustainable supply chains. This accounts for 40 percent of the time of the officers and directors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 16.9%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.15; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $246K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed
  • Consistency: 10 of 10 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.