Health Product Declaration Collaborative Inc

What it reported doing in 2024

The Health Product Declaration Collaborative created and supports the Health Product Declaration (HPD), an impartial tool for the accurate reporting of product contents and each ingredient's relationship to the bigger picture of human and ecological health. Essential information for making healthier choices The HPD Open Standard is a voluntary technical specification for reporting information on product contents and associated health information. Developed by a coalition of architects, designers, specifiers, owners, manufacturers, contractors, materials researchers, and NGOs, the HPD Open Standard is a key element in the movement toward achieving greater transparency and disclosure in reporting the human and environmental health aspects of building products and materials. Giving project teams a more informed understanding of product health- related attributes. When we speak about "using" the HPD, we are referencing the work thatproject teams - typically composed of architects, designers, engineers, construction, building owners, building managers - do to incorporate the concepts of material health into their projects. Generally a project team is working with a "completed HPD," meaning the document that is created by a manufacturer, to describe the product content and health information, using the Format and Instructions of the HPD Open Standard. Completed HPDs provide project teams with a flexible tool to incorporate material health information into their product specification and selection processes. Project teams get involved with HPDs for various reasons; among them, the following are typical scenarios: Your firm is committed to materials transparency and disclosure on health aspects of products.Your project is pursuing LEED, WELL, Living Building Challenge, or another certification that includes credits that use HPDs as a form of documentation and/or includes materials-related credits for which healthbased chemical ingredient data is required.You have policies related to requesting this information from manufacturers and implementing selection preference for products from manufacturers that are participating in transparency and disclosureprograms.Your client or customer requires you to identify and specify products from manufacturers that are participating in transparency and disclosure programs.Your firm, client, or customer has particular material ingredient policies or requests and you require disclosure information to ensure that those requests are met in your product specification.Project team resourcesOn this HPD Collaborative website you will find access to a variety of resources that can assist project teams in using the HPD, among them: Project Team User Guide: The Project Team User Guide provides project teams with practical "how to" information for using HPDs. The guide offers background information for the HPD Open Standard to help you better understand the format, what an HPD report contains, and how the informationcan be used.HPD Public Repository: All published HPDs are available for search and download, using the HPD Public Repository. This resource is provided to the public - at no charge to users - by the HPD Collaborative. Find published HPDs by product name, manufacturer and CSI Division/Section. Over 2,000 published HPDs available - and growing! Guidance for achieving LEED v4 credit: The HPD is cited as an option for achieving credit in LEED version 4, Materials and Resources - Building Product Disclosure and Optimization - Material Ingredient Reporting. HPD Versions 1.0, 2.0, and 2.1 can be used to achieve this credit. FAQs and Support System: HPDC provides a support system, where you can access our Body of Knowledge on the HPD Open Standard and its application, as well as send in a ticket with a question that you may have about how to use HPDs.Reference materials on the HPD Open Standard: The authoritative versions of the HPD Open Standard are downloadable from our website. The HPD Collaborative is a

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 76.2%; rating input score 76
• Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
• Fundraising efficiency: $36.48 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
• Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
  • Compensation committee: Pass
  • Independent consultant: Missing
  • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
  • Written employment contract: Pass
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
  • Whistleblower policy: Fail
  • Document-retention policy: Fail
  • 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: 5.9%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.77; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 19.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings