Natural Capitalism Solutions Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
141901877
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Longmont, CO, USA
Phone
7208999980
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,334,217
Expenses
$2,320,706
Assets
$2,605,862
Liabilities
$612,454

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CRAIG LEWIS (Executive Director)
  • L HUNTER LOVINS (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • CRAIG LEWIS (Executive Director): $205,200 total reported compensation
  • L HUNTER LOVINS (President): $77,500 total reported compensation
  • ROBERT NOILES (CFO): $38,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Educate Senior Decision makers in buisness, government and civil society about how to implement more regenerative practices profitablity in partnership with leading thinkers and organizations

What it reported doing in 2025

NCS partners with educational institutions, creating curriculum, teaching and lecturing globally. Hunter Lovins helped develop MBA programs at Pinchot University and Presidio Graduate School. She teaches Principles of Sustainable Management at Fordham University. Scott King of Mission Zero project educated university students on climate and clean energy solutions, including holding fairs and competitions on student solutions. Our students now work in companies large and small, governments, and entrepreneurial endeavors around the the world. Hunter and Senior Fellows, Merijn Dols and Walter Link promoted regenerative agriculture at the UN Conference of Parties in Belem Brazil.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 38
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 88.2%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 11th 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: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.6%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.8%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.8% of revenue deployed · 88.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $205K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.