Green Science Policy Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205571185
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Phone
5105415004
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,276,725
Expenses
$1,234,879
Assets
$3,721,316
Liabilities
$23,658

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ARLENE BLUM PHD (EXECUTIVE DIR): $249,032 total reported compensation
  • CAROLINE CLARKE (Dir of Ops & Devmt): $125,842 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We work at the interface between science and policy to reduce use of harmful chemicals in consumer products and building materials to protect human health and the environment. We motivate and participate in scientific research work with scientists to share their research results with government, standards bodies, and other decision makers and convene diverse high-level stakeholders to effect change in the public interest. Additionally, we educate designers, retailers, manufacturers, and institutional purchasers to empower them to reduce the use of entire classes of chemicals of concern in the products they produce, sell, or buy. Our approach has proven successful at the local, national, and international level for reducing the use of harmful chemicals.

What it reported doing in 2025

SIX CLASSES ACCOMPLISHMENTS: MEETINGS:1) We met with policymakers in Congress and agencies in Washington, DC. We educated Senate and House staff from both sides of the aisle on the class concept and the potential for harm of flame retardants and antimicrobials. During our meetings, we encouraged policy change, letters, appropriations report language, and other actions to update regulations to reduce toxic chemical exposures. 2) Held our Six Classes Toxic Reduction retreat with two dozen enthusiastic colleagues from the business, academic, government, and nonprofit sectors to discuss and develop plans for reducing the use of harmful chemicals with a focus on antimicrobials.COMMUNICATIONS: 1) Our monthly newsletter subscribers increased from 18,000 readers in 2024 to over 24,000 with a 50% open rate. Positive feedback includes Wellington Labs telling us our newsletters help them prioritize chemicals for their testing business and their LinkedIn post: Arlene's ongoing commitment to sharing environmental issues in a balanced, scientifically-sound manner helps broaden awareness across the field. 2) Arlene Blum presented on Tackling Toxics in Plastics during the Great Pacific Garbage Patch TedX and on Six Classes strategy for SETAC. Other well received talks included Living in the Toxic Soup: Solutions to the Legacy of Forever Chemicals at Bioneers and Reducing Chemical Harm for Healthier People and Planet webinar for the Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition. 3) Our joint publications with extensive press coverage included:1) Sleeping Children Exposed to Plasticizers, Flame Retardants, and UV-Filters from Their Mattresses? Environmental Science &Technology 2) Environmental Impacts of Polymeric Flame-Retardant Breakdown Nature Sustainability 3) High Potential Harm, Questionable Fire-Safety Benefit: Why Are Flame Retardants in Lithium-Ion Battery Enclosures? Environmental Science &Technology 4) Our series of Forbes articles is available at https://www.forbes.com/sites/arleneblum/SENIOR FELLOWS: We launched this visionary program in 2025 to support leading environmental health scientists and policy experts in developing and implementing new ideas to reduce chemical harm. Currently five fellows are sharing their scientific knowledge, years of experience changing chemical policies and practices, as well as their extensive networks. Senior Fellows develop strategies for healthier and safer chemistry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 83.7%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 25th 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: 3.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.01; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.9% of revenue deployed · 83.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $249K · 10 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $158K reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.