Renew Missouri Advocates

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813229949
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Columbia, MO, USA
Phone
5733030394
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Energy Resources Conservation and Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,248,771
Expenses
$1,052,245
Assets
$826,324
Liabilities
$4,412

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dan Chiles (President)
  • James Owen (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Dan Chiles (President)
  • Erin Noble (Secretary)
  • Michele Moyer (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Renew Missouris mission is committed to making Missouri a leading state for clean energy through advocacy and education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Renew Missouri works to advance and protect effective clean energy policies as well as to foster growth in the clean energy private sector by (1) Engaging in regulatory matters, (2) Pursuing legal actions to enforce and strengthem Missouris clean energy laws, (3) Educating the Missouri Legislaature, (4) Interfacing with Missouris solar, wind, and energy efficiency industries, and (5) Educating and organizing the Missouri public at the grassroots level.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.4%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 83.5%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.7%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.1% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.4% of revenue deployed · 83.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $879K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.