Cleantech San Diego Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261584423
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
8585687777
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,409,052
Expenses
$1,276,671
Assets
$558,523
Liabilities
$60,788

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASON ANDERSON (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • SHANNON BRESNAHAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ZACHARY DOBBIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JASON ANDERSON (PRESIDENT & CEO): $257,300 total reported compensation
  • ZACHARY DOBBIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $135,154 total reported compensation
  • SHANNON BRESNAHAN (VICE PRESIDENT): $117,727 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To accelerate clean technology innovation and promote the equitable deployment of sustainable solutions across the san diego region for the benefit of the economy, the environment, and all members of the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Southern California energy innovation network: the southern California energy innovation network (scein) is a free program for startups that are developing solutions to help California meet its energy goals. The program provides access to the resources and facilities of a number of regional partner organizations (listed below) and connections with industry in order to accelerate the commercialization of emerging energy technologies. 81 companies have been served by scein. Together, these startups employ 867 people, have had 560 patents approved, and have raised over $714 million in follow-on funding from public and private sources since being accepted into the program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 60% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.9%; rating input score 97; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.4%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 40%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 31 of 32 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $257K · 34 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $196K reported
  • Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.