League of Conservation Voters Education Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521379661
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027858683
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$75,210,318
Expenses
$72,352,270
Assets
$37,247,285
Liabilities
$4,287,697

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GENE KARPINSKI (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BEN FLAMM (VP, INSTITUTIONAL PARTNERS): $166,478 total reported compensation
  • IAN DANLEY (VP, CIVIC ENGAGEMENT): $162,172 total reported compensation
  • GENE KARPINSKI (PRESIDENT): $148,672 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Lcvef works to turn environmental values into national, state and local priorities. Lcvef, in collaboration with our state lcvef partners, educates the public, media and public officials about key environmental issues, (continued on schedule o) works to increase voter participation in the democratic process and mobilizes a diverse network of activists to advocate for sound environmental policies.

What it reported doing in 2024

The climate and organizing program works with and supports state affiliates and other partners to educate the public and media about the importance of addressing climate change. The goal of the program is to educate and engage enough people to call for the united states to become a world leader in helping to tackle climate change.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 84% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 90%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $35.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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; 77th 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: 3.8%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87% of revenue deployed · 90% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $65.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $166K · 15 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.4M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 48 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 42 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.