Responsible Battery Coalition Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
815250375
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025779050
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,133,500
Expenses
$2,140,416
Assets
$243,174
Liabilities
$91,424

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ADAM MULLERWEISS (PRESIDENT)
  • STEVE CHRISTENSEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • ADAM MULLERWEISS (PRESIDENT)
  • PHIL COZAD (SECRETARY)
  • MICAH THOMPSON (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

A coalition of companies, academics and organizations committed to the responsible management of the batteries of today and tomorrow.created to advance the responsible production, transport, sale, use, reuse, recycling, and resource recovery of transportation, industrial and stationary batteries and other energy storage devices, and the development of future battery technologies.

What it reported doing in 2025

Responsible battery coalition was created to advance the responsible production, transport, sale, use, reuse, recycling, and resource recovery of transportation, industrial and stationary batteries and other energy storage devices, and the development of future battery technologies. Our priorities are (1) to promote life-cycle management regardless of technology, (2) to address current vehicle batteries not recycled each year, and (3) to develop best practices for the next generation of batteries. A responsible battery meets a specific need efficiently and effectively, is properly managed across its life-cycle to prevent harm to people or the environment, and is reused where possible and ultimately recycled.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -88.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $343K reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.