Clean Air Now

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330087555
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Riverside, CA, USA
Phone
9517817320
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10
Expenses
$36
Assets
$6,555

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VIRGINIA FIELD (Vice President)
  • JAMES PROVENZANO (President & CEO)

People named in this filing

  • VIRGINIA FIELD (Vice President)
  • JAMES PROVENZANO (President & CEO)
  • VERNON T HALL (TREASURER)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Clean air now statement of purposepublic education regarding the health effects of air pollution and to prom0te clean air strategies.

What it reported doing in 2017

Clean Air Now Statement of AccomplishmentsClean Air Now (CAN) is one of the oldest clean-air advocacy groups in the nation. CAN was founded in Riverside, California in 1969 to publicize the health effects of air pollution and to promote clean air strategies. Since its founding, CAN has partnered with public and private entities such as the U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Department of Transportation, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Agilent Technologies, Southern California Edison, Shell Hydrogen, and others to implement and demonstrate clean-energy technologies and air quality education programs. CAN's projects have ranged from supporting the establishment of regional air quality management districts and orchestrating California's adoption of gasoline vapor recovery systems to hydrogen-energy technology demonstrations at Xerox Corporation, SunLine Transit Agency, and U.C. Davis. Since 2005, CAN has undertaken the sponsorship and implementation of the Clean Air Challenge Curriculum Program which teaches students about air pollution, its' causes, and its' health effects. The laboratory-oriented curriculum also contains modules emphasizing air pollution mitigating behaviors, technologies and fuels.The math-science-based Clean Air Challenge Curriculum Program (CAC) started in 1995 as a curriculum product of the well-established publisher Enterprise for Education Santa Monica, California. Since its first printing in 1998, CAC has been revised six times to broaden its academic strengths and hone its approach to air quality education. In 2006, the AQMD Governing Board approved $140,000 co-funding for development of the CAC to meet California State Science Content Standards and to provide training and materials to middle and high school science teachers and their students.In 2009, the South Coast AQMD board approved $60,000 co-funding for the CAC to continue to provide training and material to middle and high school science teachers in our region. CAC addresses air quality, its health effects, and cleaner technology.The two-to-three week curriculum unit comprises approximately 17 hours of engaging labs and lessons that address five essential questions:1) What is air pollution and how is is formed?2) Does air pollution affect people?3) How significant a problem is air pollution in our community?4) Can we make better choices to clean up our air?5) What conclusions can we draw from our study? As students address these questions, they learn how to be part of the solution to improving air quality.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -260%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 182.08; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -27.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -37.5% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -24.1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $36 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.