Global Warming Mitigation Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823056808
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Aspen, CO, USA
Phone
9704562054
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,269,179
Expenses
$1,636,912
Assets
$864,268
Liabilities
$143

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACQUELYN FRANCIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MICHAEL KLEIN (PRESIDENT & TREASURER)

Highest reported compensation

  • JACQUELYN FRANCIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $114,506 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Awarding the keeling curve prize to organizations or individuals who make a substantial impact in efforts to mitigate global warming as it affects the united states and elsewhere.

What it reported doing in 2024

The keeling curve prize (kcp) recognizes and supports innovative climate solutions that aim to bend the keeling curve downward, ultimately reducing the concentration of atmospheric co2 and other greenhouse gases. Our prize acknowledges projects and initiatives from around the globe that are making significant strides in addressing climate change, promoting sustainability, and advancing decarbonization efforts. By celebrating these advancements, we hope to inspire continued progress in the fight against global warming and encourage the adoption of impactful climate solutions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.7%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $43.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -29%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.4% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $115K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.