Mason County Climate Justice

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
922419503
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Shelton, WA, USA
Phone
3605453671
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Energy Resources Conservation and Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$938,911
Expenses
$387,392
Assets
$1,330,399
Liabilities
$337,895

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JULIANNE GALE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JULIANNE GALE (PRESIDENT): $70,548 total reported compensation
  • SHERRI DYSART (TREASURER): $588 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL SIPTROTH (DIRECTOR): $588 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Mason county climate justice envisions and co-creates local climate solutions that regenerate healthy ecosystems, benefit everyone in our rural community, and align with climate justice movements around the world.

What it reported doing in 2025

Just transition: through grantmaking, coalition work, and leadership development trainings, mason county climate justice works for a just transition from an extractive economy to a zero-waste regenerative economy that allows all forms of life to thrive in balance. In 2025, we funded mason county's only multilingual food bank, collaborated with a mobile home park cooperative to build a home repair tool library, and developed the next generation of mason county leadership through our cedar stewards of mason county (csmc) project. Csmc youth leaders conducted community research, served on advisory committees, and won local policy changes that benefit everyone in our rural community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.4%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $106.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th 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: 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: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 58.7%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.43; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.9%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 50% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 47.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 74.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.4% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $338K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $71K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.