Environmental Working Group (EWG)
Advocacy groupA US 501(c)(3) advocacy and research nonprofit that publishes consumer tools and rankings. · United States
Visit the source site · Audited 2026-10-14
Who pays for it
For the fiscal year ending December 2025, EWG reported $16,366,034 in revenue, including $13,191,054 in contributions and grants; it also earns licensing, certification and affiliate income.
Status: Labeled
Labeled because EWG is an advocacy group with certification and affiliate revenue. Its rankings are relative screening tools, not personal exposure assessments.
How SafeMomma uses it
SafeMomma identifies EWG as advocacy research and does not treat its rankings as stand-alone personal health-risk estimates.
The audit
- Who controls it
- EWG's own science and research staff publish its consumer tools. Its 2025 methods paper disclosed that six authors worked for EWG, which publishes the guide; no political appointee or outside industry editor was identified for the databases reviewed.
- Money
- EWG's public funding page describes 2024 revenue as about half individual donations and one-third private foundations, with the remainder from licensing, consulting, in-kind support and events. Its 2024 audited statements separately list $1,479,875 in EWG Verified/Reviewed program income and $480,866 in private-sector revenue, mainly Amazon commissions and Tap Water Database royalties.
- Conflict rules
- EWG says companies in evaluated product categories cannot provide programmatic support, sponsor research, or pay for database inclusion or ratings. Product pages disclose affiliate links, and consumer-guide pages do not consistently show author-level disclosures.
- Method
- The 2025-refined produce guide scores 47 produce types using USDA residue data and four equally weighted measures: abundance, diversity, intensity and toxicity. The relative score is not a dose-based risk estimate for an individual, diet or pregnancy.
- Dates on its pages
- The official page identifies a 2026 guide and a 2025 methodology update, but the reviewed text does not show the exact 2026 release date.
- Political exposure
- EWG is nongovernmental and advocates for policy change. In 2025 it added a toxicity component to its produce ranking; the review found no evidence that a donor, regulator or political official caused the change, or ordered removal or reversal of a pregnancy or breastfeeding page.
- Money exposure
- EWG Verified charges $250 per-product evaluation plus an annual licensing fee that varies by product count and company revenue. EWG says the evaluation fee does not buy a favorable decision; no evidence reviewed showed a fee or commission paid for a rating or changed the pesticide list.
- Track record
- A 2024 screening assessment of EWG's 2022 list found chronic exposure below EPA health-based guidance values in the scenarios tested, while noting gaps for acute and cumulative risk. EWG's 2025 biomarker study found no association in the full analysis; a significant association appeared only after potatoes were excluded. No formal retraction of that paper or correction of a specific pregnancy or breastfeeding page was identified.
Where this comes from
Incentive exposure describes pressure from money or politics, not whether the source is right. Funding alone does not show influence.