Independent Energy Producers Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942851588
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sloughhouse, CA, USA
Phone
9164489499
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,416,787
Expenses
$1,231,556
Assets
$1,454,136
Liabilities
$1,002,503

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jan Smutny-Jones (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jan Smutny-Jones (CEO): $325,453 total reported compensation
  • Sara Fitzsimon (Policy Director): $178,661 total reported compensation
  • Jamie Parker (Admn Assnt): $175,892 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Independent Energy Producers Association (IEPA) represents developers and operators of independent energy facilities and power marketers in California and the Western United States. IEPA actively supports competitive markets to provide electricity users with reliable, affordable, and clean electricity. IEPA members utilize clean energy resources including geothermal, wind, solar, biomass, energy storage, hybrid technologies, combined heat and power, and efficient natural gas generation. Since 1982, IEPA has actively represented the interests of its members in legislative and regulatory proceedings in California and before Federal agencies. IEPA has played an active role in addressing transmission issues in the Western energy market. IEPAs primary goals include enhancing competitive markets for electricity and safeguarding investments made in producing independent electricity facilities

What it reported doing in 2024

Independent Energy Producers, Inc. is active before the California PUC, the California Energy Commission and the California Legislature representing the interests of operating independent energy projects and to ensure that California remains a healthy market for development in the independent energy industry.IEP holds an Annual Meeing which is open to the public. The Conference is centered around subjects of topical interest, with discussion panels comprised of industry experts providing up to date information.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 4th 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: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: 13.1%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.18; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.69; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 55.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -7.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $325K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $176K reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 13 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.