Comer demands communications of NGOs that received $20B in Biden EPA grants

In a move signaling heightened scrutiny over federal spending, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) has launched an investigation into eight nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that received a staggering $20 billion in grants from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) during the Biden administration. On March 27, 2025, Comer formally requested detailed communications and documentation from these groups, raising concerns about transparency, accountability, and the potential misuse of taxpayer funds. The probe centers on grants awarded under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, a landmark piece of legislation that allocated billions for environmental and climate initiatives, including what has been dubbed the “green bank” program.

Background: The $20 Billion Green Bank Grants

The $20 billion in question stems from two key programs under the Inflation Reduction Act: the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) and related environmental justice initiatives. These programs were designed to funnel money to nonprofits, community development banks, and other organizations to finance clean energy projects and support disadvantaged communities disproportionately affected by pollution and climate change. Announced in stages throughout 2023 and 2024, the grants were celebrated by the Biden administration as a transformative step toward climate equity and economic revitalization.

However, the allocation of these funds has come under fire. Critics, including Comer and newly appointed EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, allege that the Biden EPA rushed to distribute the money—sometimes to newly formed or poorly vetted organizations—before the transition to the Trump administration in January 2025. Reports have surfaced that some of these NGOs had little to no prior revenue or operational history, prompting accusations of political favoritism and inadequate oversight.

Comer’s Investigation: A Call for Transparency

In his letters to the eight NGOs, Comer demanded a comprehensive set of records, including all communications related to the grants, details on staff salaries, and evidence of how the funds were spent. His stated goal is to uncover whether the Biden EPA engaged in “corrupt self-dealing” by awarding billions to political allies under the guise of environmental justice. “The Biden EPA tried to dodge any oversight by striking a shady deal with a financial institution to cover up its corrupt self-dealing that rewarded political cronies pushing a far-left environmental agenda,” Comer said in a statement.

The investigation builds on earlier efforts by Comer and other Republican lawmakers to examine the Biden administration’s environmental policies. In collaboration with Subcommittee Chairman Eric Burlison (R-Mo.), Comer has praised the Trump administration’s moves to terminate these programs and freeze unspent funds, citing concerns over waste, fraud, and abuse. The Oversight Committee’s probe now seeks to peel back the layers of what Comer describes as a “gold bar” scheme—a reference to a Biden-era EPA employee’s leaked remark likening the rushed grant awards to “throwing gold bars off the Titanic.”

The NGOs Under Scrutiny

While the specific NGOs named in Comer’s request have not been fully detailed in public statements, prior reporting offers clues. Groups like Climate United Fund, the Coalition for Green Capital, and Power Forward Communities—each recipients of billions under the GGRF—have been linked to the controversy. Some of these organizations were established shortly before receiving funds, raising questions about their qualifications. For instance, Power Forward Communities, formed in October 2023, was awarded $2 billion despite its nascent status, though its member organizations, such as Habitat for Humanity, tout extensive experience in community development.

Additionally, ties to prominent Democratic figures have fueled speculation. Stacey Abrams, the former Georgia gubernatorial candidate, has been associated with one recipient group that reportedly received $2 billion to distribute energy-efficient appliances—a move critics have labeled a “vote-buying scheme.” Comer’s probe aims to determine whether such connections influenced the grant awards and whether the funds were used appropriately.

The Trump EPA’s Response

Since taking office, the Trump administration has moved swiftly to unwind Biden-era environmental programs. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced in February 2025 that he had discovered the $20 billion “parked” at an outside financial institution—allegedly Citibank—in a deliberate effort to limit government oversight. Zeldin terminated the grant agreements in March, citing “substantial concerns” over fraud, waste, and conflicts of interest. However, his efforts have faced legal pushback from recipients like Climate United, which sued the EPA to restore access to their funds, arguing that the awards were legally mandated by Congress.

A federal judge’s ruling on March 20, 2025, temporarily blocked Zeldin’s attempt to reclaim the money, preserving the status quo until further court proceedings. This legal battle underscores the broader tension between the Trump administration’s rollback agenda and the Biden-era commitments enshrined in law.

Broader Implications

Comer’s investigation is more than a partisan skirmish—it’s a test of how federal funds are allocated and monitored in an era of polarized climate policy. The $20 billion in grants represents a significant chunk of the Inflation Reduction Act’s $740 billion price tag, and its fate could shape future environmental spending. If Comer uncovers evidence of mismanagement or political favoritism, it could bolster Republican efforts to dismantle similar programs and tighten oversight of federal agencies.

For environmental advocates, the probe is a threat to hard-won progress. Groups like Climate United argue that the funds are critical for financing clean energy projects—such as solar installations and electric vehicle infrastructure—that benefit underserved communities. They contend that the Trump EPA’s actions jeopardize jobs and climate goals, accusing Zeldin and Comer of prioritizing politics over policy.

What’s Next?

As of March 27, 2025, the NGOs have yet to formally respond to Comer’s demands, though they face mounting pressure to comply. The Oversight Committee has promised to work with the Department of Justice and the EPA’s Inspector General to investigate further, signaling a long road ahead. Meanwhile, the courts will play a pivotal role in determining whether the $20 billion remains with the NGOs or returns to federal control.

For now, Comer’s probe has reignited a fierce debate over accountability, environmental justice, and the legacy of the Biden administration’s climate agenda. As the investigation unfolds, it promises to reveal whether the $20 billion was a bold investment in America’s future—or, as Comer alleges, a “shady deal” that squandered taxpayer dollars.