Process Gas Consumers Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521134672
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027994440
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$90,000
Expenses
$91,320
Assets
$34,117
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • TERRY J LEWANDOWSKI (CHAIRMAN)
  • JUSTIN WALDER (VICE CHAIRMAN)
  • KELLY SMITH (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Process gas consumers group (pgc) was formed to enable industrial gas users to speak with one voice on matters of common interest concerning policies affecting the supply and price of natural gas as well as natural gas transportation services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Pgc advocates natural gas policies that promote competition and the operation of free market forces. Further, pgc promotes open access and prevents discriminatory transportation for all customers on pipeline and local distribution system. Moreover, pgc works to create equitable and responsible regulations in those sectors where consumers continue to need protection from gas companies' exercise of market power (particularly in the pipelines and local utilities transportation function). Particularly at the local level, pgc works to see that local utility gas service rates are unbundled and based on actual costs of service. Finally, the organization seeks more rapid approval of interstate natural gas pipeline projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.5%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -7.6% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.