Natural Allies Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
852991975
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Montgomery, TX, USA
Phone
7132037543
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,218,321
Expenses
$2,744,623
Assets
$10,083,980
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LANE WILSON (PRESIDENT/SECRETARY)
  • SUSAN DISON WALLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/TREASURER/SECRETARY)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUSAN DISON WALLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/TREASURER/SECRETARY): $216,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The corporation's specific mission and activities shall include: (1) informing and educating the public and thought leaders about the societal, technical, environmental, and emissions benefits of natural gas; (2) supporting natural gas as a reliable, affordable, safe resource that promotes the welfare and quality of life of the american public; and (3) conducting research and publicizing the positions of thought leaders concerning these issues and encouraging current and future natural gas use.

What it reported doing in 2024

Natural allies for a clean energy future formed in august 2020 to establish a long-term public affairs approach to educate and inform about the central role natural gas and natural gas infrastructure play in the clean energy future and as a partner to renewables. We determined that it is time we work together to proactively tell our industry's story and re-define the role of natural gas in fighting climate change, and as the most affordable and reliable energy source.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 90% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 36.4%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 99.9%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 66.6%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.67; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.8% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 53.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 36.4% of revenue deployed · 99.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $216K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.7M reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.