New York Solar Energy Industries Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223777367
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Long Island City, NY, USA
Phone
5183902890
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Business and Industry

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,112,479
Expenses
$1,168,209
Assets
$273,886
Liabilities
$207,841

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL MONTANTE (PRESIDENT)
  • REID GARTON (VICE PRESIDENT - RESIDENTI)
  • EMILIE FLANAGAN (VICE PRESIDENT - COMMERCIA)
  • NOAH GINSBURG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NOAH GINSBURG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $184,921 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Nyseia's mission is to educate the public, legistlators, policymakers, and regulartors on the environmental, economic development, and energy-supply benefits of solar energy use. Nyseia collaborates with renewable energy, environmental, and economic development groups to expand solar energy in New York state

What it reported doing in 2024

Nyseia continued its advocacy for greater access to distributed solar energy generation for New York residents, businesses, and localities. Nyseia worked with association members, partner organizations, and New York state legislators and officials to aid in the continued implementation of ny sun initiatives and state targets for renewable energy. Nyseia engaged nyserda and other agencies in discussion on solar incentive levels, and property tax. Issues around interconnection of solar energy development with the grid remained a priority. The association also worked on issues of rate design, siting of energy projects, and regional energy issues in long island.

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 100% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.6%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 76.7%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.23; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.76; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 28.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.4% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.8% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.6% of revenue deployed · 76.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $896K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $185K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $120K reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.