Nrdc Action Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133976062
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2127272700
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,178,650
Expenses
$16,974,368
Assets
$11,466,906
Liabilities
$2,491,559

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

Leadership & pay

37 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MANISH BAPNA (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • CHRISTINA GOLDFUSS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • KEVIN CURTIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THRU 02/2025))

Highest reported compensation

  • MANISH BAPNA (PRESIDENT/CEO): $793,129 total reported compensation
  • MOLLIE MARSH-HEINE (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $637,108 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINA GOLDFUSS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $534,386 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

Climate and energyduring the fiscal year that ended june 30, 2025, the nrdc action fund worked to expand and mobilize our influential constituencies, experts, community leaders, and others to champion clean air and water, public health, biodiversity, and a stable climate. We lobbied decision makers on the federal and state levels to protect and strengthen environmental policies. We held elected officials accountable by educating constituents when their congressional representatives voted for or against environmental priorities and exposing those who sided with polluters rather than the public good. (see schedule o)we supported political candidates who stood up for the environment and equitable climate action and worked to help elect climate champions to congress.examples of the nrdc action fund's federal advocacy include lobbying and media campaigns to advocate against legislation that would repeal clean energy and other pro-climate legislation. The nrdc action fund also engaged in advocacy and accountability on the state level, supporting public engagement and advocacy efforts to advance equitable clean energy solutions to the climate crisis.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 62% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -84.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $13.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $793K · 37 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.8M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 28 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 27 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.