Institute for Local Self Reliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237394104
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2028981610
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,406,403
Expenses
$6,354,323
Assets
$9,701,166
Liabilities
$321,683

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • STACY MITCHELL (CO-DIRECTOR): $175,168 total reported compensation
  • JOHN FARRELL (CO-DIRECTOR): $166,567 total reported compensation
  • BRENDA PLATT (COMPOSTING D): $153,233 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 provide the conceptual framework, strategies, and information to aid the creation of ecologically-sound and equitable communities. To that end, ilsr works with citizens, activists, policymakers, and entrepreneurs to design systems, policies, and industries that meet local or regional needs; to maximize local human, material, natural, and financial resources; and to ensure that the benefits of these systems and resources accrue to all local citizens.

What it reported doing in 2024

Independent business - the independent business initiative champions locally owned businesses, leads efforts to fight the unchecked power of corporate giants like walmart and amazon, and seeks to reverse the government policies that work against these small, independent businesses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 90.2%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $36.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • 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: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 38th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 24.4%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.4% of revenue deployed · 90.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 15 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $217K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 21 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.