Green Electronics Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205090246
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
5032799383
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,046,873
Expenses
$4,952,086
Assets
$5,137,572
Liabilities
$2,250,878

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES MITCHELL (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES MITCHELL (CEO): $384,298 total reported compensation
  • KAUSHIK RAMAKRISHNAN (VP, GLOBAL MARKET DEV. & STRATEGY): $246,899 total reported compensation
  • PATRICIA DILLON (VP, CRITERIA AND CATEGORY DEV.): $224,112 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Gec advocates for sustainable it by helping both manufacturers and large scale purchasers to: 1. Understand the challenges facing sustainable it, 2. Commit to address those challenges, 3. Act to change internal operational, manufacturing, and procurement behaviors.

What it reported doing in 2024

Epeat purchaser relationship management: gec acts as the fulcrum point between those who buy (institutional purchasers) and those who make (information technology brands). We understand that by deciding to buy sustainable it products, institutional purchasers can really "move the needle" towards a more sustainable world. Gec is proud to support institutional purchasers in their implementation of sustainable procurement and along with our flagship program epeat, we provide additional tools and resources to assist institutional purchasers in buying sustainable it products.(continued on schedule o) this includes the gec purchasers guide series, individual guidance documents that explain how to address sustainability concepts like circular economy, sustainable development goals or labor & human rights in the procurement process while still achieving a successful procurement; directions on how purchasers can gain credit for their sustainable procurement activities when reporting to entities such as gri and cdp; and webinars that explain the differences between public and private sector sustainable procurement approaches.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 52
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.7%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 1.9%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.04; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.7% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $384K · 18 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.