Metropolitan Energy Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431297891
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8165317283
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,925,000
Expenses
$3,090,427
Assets
$1,536,814
Liabilities
$871,474

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kelly Gilbert (Executive Director)
  • Rick Maniktala (President)
  • Eslun Tucker (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kelly Gilbert (Executive Director): $79,514 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Metropolitan Energy Center's mission to empower the heartland to achieve sustainable energy use and cleaner air by providing resources, outreach and training available to all who aspire to make energy efficiency and alternative fuels commonplace.

What it reported doing in 2024

Sustainable Transportation: Through our projects and programmatic activities, in 2024 alone we helped local government and private fleets to directly eliminate approximately 12,000 tons of greenhouse gases by replacing approximately 8,000,000 gallons of gasoline and diesel with clean fuels, electricity, and reduced vehicle usage. These benefits also directly increase human health in affected areas. Our activities include providing decision-support resources to organizational management, as well as direct technical and funding assistance. We also engage directly with the general public through information campaigns and with local and state policymakers as subject matter experts. Long-term programmatic areas of engagement include Kansas City Regional Clean Cities and Central Kansas Clean Cities coalitions, both of which operate locally, and access and contribute to a nationwide network of peers; Mid-America Green Fleets, providing fleet technical assistance and coaching; Electrify Heartland, overseeing electric vehicle projects and programming, including to the general public; and Biodiesel Outreach and Training, providing informational resources to fleets and fuel retailers and providing training to college students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 91% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 42% for direct work, and 58% for grants.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.4%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 84.5%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $79.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th 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: 99.7%; rating input score 100; 40th 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.7%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.4% of revenue deployed · 84.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 11 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $107K reported
  • Consistency: 44 of 44 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.