North American Passive House Network Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823468214
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
9293768539
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Quality, Protection, and Beautification N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$756,081
Expenses
$560,010
Assets
$175,455
Liabilities
$115,229

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • BRUCE K LEVENSON (EXECUTIVE DI): $55,192 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 transformation of the built environment, using the tools developed by the passive house institute, in a critical effort to combat global warming. We provide training, conferences, and other events to both engage and educate design and building professional, policymakers , and the general public. We support the success and vitality of the passive house community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Training and advocacy: naphn provides specialized trainings to architects, engineers, builders, building owners, and others, in cities across the us. The naphn is the premier course provider for certified passive house designer and consultant trainings across north america. The naphn has facilitated policy advocacy between local, national and international regions by hosting a special policymakers track at the annual conference. Regional policy makers have helped us host these to assemble collaborators from other innovative regions to efficiently share resources and ideas. Specialty trainings are hosted to encourage practitioners and manufacturers to advance the performance of components and buildings.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.4%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 69.3%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th 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: 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.66; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.4% of revenue deployed · 69.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $388K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $55K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.