Partnership for Policy Integrity

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271542291
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Amherst, MA, USA
Phone
4132533256
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$905,735
Expenses
$988,379
Assets
$781,916
Liabilities
$44,981

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mary Booth (Executive Director and Clerk)
  • Richard Wiles (Board President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mary Booth (Executive Director and Clerk): $200,000 total reported compensation
  • Sam Davis (Staff Scientist): $105,972 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

What it reported doing in 2025

Educating EU policy makers about forest climate and air impacts of burning wood for energy, planning legal actions in UK and EU, educating policymakers and the public about the need to remove incentives for biomass energy in US state and federal policy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.2%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 83.3%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.1%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.2% of revenue deployed · 83.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $823K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $200K · 5 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.