Health Effects Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042708045
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
6174882300
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,252,068
Expenses
$15,743,082
Assets
$10,167,337
Liabilities
$4,283,655

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELENA CRAFT (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT O'KEEFE (FORMER VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT O'KEEFE (FORMER VICE PRESIDENT): $411,466 total reported compensation
  • ELENA CRAFT (PRESIDENT): $399,400 total reported compensation
  • DONNA VORHEES (DIRECTOR OF HEI ENERGY): $318,234 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Health effects institute's mission is to conduct independent research to provide high-quality, impartial and relevant science on the health effects of air pollution. This is done by identifying the highest priority areas for health effect research; funding and overseeing research; providing independent review of related research projects; collaborating with other institutions; communication of results of hei research and analyses to public and private decision makers.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hei's global initiatives program engages in projects around the world, applying science to better understand the health impacts of air pollution. Working closely with local and regional partners, especially in areas in africa and asia, the program informs policy action globally, from broad strategies to local, targeted initiatives, and strengthening scientific capacity to complement ongoing in-country activities. The program's flagship initiative, state of global air (soga), tracks annual air pollution exposures for fine particles, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and household air pollution in addition to the burden of disease attributable to air pollution in cities and countries around the world.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.

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: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: -18.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.7%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $13.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $411K · 23 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 36 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 41 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 19 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.
  • 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: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.