Greenlink Analytics Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 830597035
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Atlanta, GA, USA
- Phone
- 4045329201
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Energy Resources Conservation and Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,526,307
- Expenses
- $1,593,737
- Assets
- $1,158,804
- Liabilities
- $148,066
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- WILLIAM MATTHEW COX (Executive Dir.): $209,923 total reported compensation
- ETAN GUMERMAN (DIR ANALYTICS): $156,610 total reported compensation
- KAVIN MANICKARAJ (CHIEF DATA SCIENTI): $112,852 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To promote sustainable development through the provision of scientific research and educational resources. We focus primarily on mitigating the negative impacts of energy use, producing original research designed to educate the public, organizations, and governments about the social impacts of the current energy system, the impacts of alternative decisions, and aiming to help people understand more efficient, cost-effective, and socially beneficial energy choices. Through this work, we help create a stable social, economic, and environmental foundation for all.
What it reported doing in 2024
Educational speaking engagements regarding scientific advancements in climate and energy research.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 78% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83.7%; rating input score 84
- Program expense ratio: 79.8%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
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: 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: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4.4%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 36.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 25.6% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 83.7% of revenue deployed · 79.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $210K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.