Rogue Climate

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464714467
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Phoenix, OR, USA
Phone
5413019204
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,066,406
Expenses
$1,238,522
Assets
$973,873
Liabilities
$17,052

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Isabella Tibbetts (President)
  • Brooke Nuckles (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ann Rusk (Operations Director): $88,979 total reported compensation
  • Brooke Nuckles (Executive Director): $80,554 total reported compensation
  • Colleen Dixon (Interim ED (former)): $44,375 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Rogue Climate's mission is to empower Southern Oregon communities most impacted by climate change including low-income, rural, youth, seniors & communities of color, to win climate justice by organizing for clean energy, sustainable jobs & a healthy environment.

What it reported doing in 2025

Rogue Climate operates community-based programs to address climate justice in Southern Oregon and the south coast of Oregon. This is accomplished through providing leadership development and civic engagement trainings for young people, supporting the implementation of clean energy, and climate action in the region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.2%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 60.2%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

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: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.1%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.5%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.1% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.2% of revenue deployed · 60.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $746K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $89K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.