Solar Washington
Legal name: Solar Washington Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 912083819
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Seattle, WA, US
- Phone
- 5092219721
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Energy Resources Conservation and Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $68,854
- Expenses
- $63,620
- Assets
- $63,455
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Luke Tolley (Executive Director)
- Rachel Gates (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Luke Tolley (Executive Director)
- Richard Hartung (Secretary)
- Rachel Gates (Vice President)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To promote the adoption of solar energy across Washington State.
What it reported doing in 2025
Annual Solar Summit conference serving ~230 people, advancing knowledge in the field, providing solar energy education and information
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 85.5%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 93%; rating input score 93
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 7.6%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 40.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 85.5% of revenue deployed · 93% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $59K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.