True Costs Initiative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813796649
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Brookline, MA, USA
Phone
8572931660
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,271,000
Expenses
$1,253,879
Assets
$331,079
Liabilities
$21,595

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CONNIEL MALEK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CONNIEL MALEK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $343,805 total reported compensation
  • PEGGY CHU (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $162,077 total reported compensation
  • NITTAYA SAENBUT (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $133,076 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

True costs initiative (tci) seeks to increase corporate accountability and to strengthen legal systems in the global south by driving collaboration among communities, funders, and creative leaders in an effort to tip the balance so corporations are held accountable for and internalize the true environmental and human costs of their actions.

What it reported doing in 2025

Tci provided recommendations for funding 70 ngos which advance corporate accountability and the rule of law. Tci facilitated collaboration between grantee partners, funders, and community experts on three occasions to support grantee partners in expanding their funder base. Tci provided consultations to grantee partners on 12 occasions. Tci supported eight science and law fellows in fellowship programs with host ngos. The organization published articles and engaged in 24 speaking events with funders, academics, community organizers, and students. Tci continued to work with other NGO's to develop training and educational programs and learning agendas; increased the capacity of these ngos by mentoring; and provided vulnerable communites with access to legal and technical tools and knowledge infrastructure.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.6%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 74.6%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $550.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 43.2%; rating input score 43; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 51%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.8% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.6% of revenue deployed · 74.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $935K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $344K · 6 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.