Thomas Alva Edison Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 522106274
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-PF 2012
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2025085000
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Philanthropy, Charity, Voluntarism Promotion
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,310,559
- Expenses
- $1,569,839
- Assets
- $3,249,649
- Liabilities
- $156,445
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MR DANNY R BROUILLETTE (PRESIDENT THRU 10/24)
- MS PATRICIA K VINCENT-COLLAWN (MEMBER THRU 10/24, PRESIDENT 10/24)
- MR BRIAN L WOLFF (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT THRU 9/24)
- MS EMILY SANFORD FISHER (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT THRU 7/24)
- MR PHILIP DION (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT)
- MS LISA WOOD (FORMER VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MR THOMAS R KUHN (MEMBER): $12,453,228 total reported compensation
- MR DANNY R BROUILLETTE (PRESIDENT THRU 10/24): $3,202,244 total reported compensation
- MR BRIAN L WOLFF (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT THRU 9/24): $3,049,610 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The edison foundation is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization dedicated to bringing the benefits of electricity to families, businesses, and industries worldwide.
What it reported doing in 2024
The edison foundation's institute for the energy transition (iet) focuses on assessing the key 24/7 zero-emitting and related technologies necessary to achieving carbon emissions reduction goals reliably and affordably and periodically updating these assessments for all stakeholders to reflect significant developments, including deployments and improved economic fundamentals. Iet also focuses on identifying solutions to the legal, regulatory, and policy issues that must be addressed to ensure that these technologies can be deployed as soon as they are demonstrated and economic. During cy2024, the following were significant accomplishments of the institute for the energy transition: iet executive clean technology dialoguesiet organized executive clean tech dialogues on wildfire mitigation technologies, carbon capture and storage technologies, and a range of other current and emerging clean energy technologies of interest. The dialogues featured technology company executives in conversation with electric company ceos and senior executives. Eei 2024iet and iei partnered with eei to organize the hub sessions at eei 2024, which featured tech talks, panel discussions, and ceo conversations focused on near- and longer-term clean energy and customer-focused technologies.long duration energy storage (ldes) summitiet organized the inaugural long duration energy storage (ldes) summit with ldes partnership members doe, epri, and the ldes council. The event featured case studies of new ldes pilot programs undertaken by edison electric institute members and others.global power sector assessment in 2024, iet published key findings from the report it engaged icf to produce analyzing power sector emissions globally, which contains country and sector specific data, including detailed information on the u.s. Power sector. Key findings from the report were translated into infographics and one-pagers that were made available on the iet website. Emerging technologiesiet undertook a range of activities to highlight emerging technologies, including holding an event highlighting advanced transmission technologies during cera week and co-sponsoring several events focusing on wildfire mitigation technologies.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 78
- Sustainability: 30
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 91%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 87.7%; rating input score 88; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 20th 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: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -19.8%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.07; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 136.4%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $12.5M · 28 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.