Insurance for Good Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
994233773
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
3143900220
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Reported finances

Revenue
$920,783
Expenses
$277,065
Assets
$757,256
Liabilities
$113,736

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Carolyn Kousky (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Carolyn Kousky (President): $63,183 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Insurance for Good is a non-profit designed to be the hub for a growing community of practice of people and institutions in the United States working to harness risk transfer in support of social and environmental goals. Were focused on improving equity in disaster recovery driving investments in resilience accelerating the energy transition and supporting nature positive approaches.

What it reported doing in 2025

To help manage the fiscal risk of disasters for both the municipality and their residents local leaders need a deeper understanding of insurance and risk transfer tools and how those can integrate into broader community resilience and recovery efforts. Through its Learning Lab Insurance for Good provides education and capacity building from subject matter experts to cohorts of communities as well as coordination and support for peer-learning. This one-year program includes education on how risk transfer and the insurance sector work insights from national experts case studies and lessons learned from peer community leaders and tailored support from the Insurance for Good team. In 2025 Insurance for Good: hired a program lead conducted research to understand gaps in the market and gauge demand conducted interviews with target users to inform program design developed and revised program structure and curriculum and partnered with MACH a consortium of researchers led by Rutgers University to launch first cohort targeted for Spring 2026.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $59.57 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 69.9%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.73; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.8%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 192.3% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 194.4% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $231K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.