Lemonade Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364962172
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Mesa, AZ, USA
Phone
6026994829
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$510,433
Expenses
$463,057
Assets
$42,536,950
Liabilities
$3,160

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Daniel Schreiber (President)

People named in this filing

  • Daniel Schreiber (President)
  • SHAI WININGER (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Deliver exponential social impact to the world, through the use of advanced technology

What it reported doing in 2025

DURING THE TAX YEAR, THE ORGANIZATION CONTINUED THE LEMONADE CRYPTO CLIMATE COALITION, A FIRST-OF-ITS-KIND BLOCKCHAIN BASED PARAMETRIC CROP PROTECTION FOR SUBSISTENCE FARMERS. The Lemonade Crypto Climate Coalition was formed to solve three main challenges: accurately quantifying weather risks automating claim assessment and providing adequate funding and reinsurance. The Lemonade Crypto Climate Coalition brings together industry-leading partners with expertise in various fields to work together on solving these challenges. Avalanche, Chainlink, and DAOstack will contribute their vast knowledge of blockchain technology while Lemonade, Etherisc, Hannover Re, and Pula will build highly accurate, fully automated weather insurance models. The coalition is being constituted as a Decentralized Autonomous Organization DAO, dedicated to building and distributing insurance at-cost, based on an eco-friendly, proof-of-stake blockchain. FARMERS STARTED USING THIS NEW INSURANCE IN 2022.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.8%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 62.3%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 9.3%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 91.86; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -61.3% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.8% of revenue deployed · 62.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 2 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $288K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $228K reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.