Coalition for Better Ads

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814575786
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2023444112
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Consumer Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$840,000
Expenses
$806,111
Assets
$885,366
Liabilities
$720,749

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • CHRIS OSWALD (CHAIRMAN)
  • LARTEASE TIFFITH (SECRETARY)
  • ALISON PEPPER (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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To improve consumers' experience with online advertising by leveraging consumer insights and cross-industry expertise to develop and implement new global standards for online advertising that address consumer expectations.

What it reported doing in 2025

The coalition for better ads seeks to carry out its mission through the following activities: 1. Conduct research regarding user preference in different environments e.g., desktop, mobile and regions for online advertising 2. Based on this methodology, create standards for effectiveness and prefernece of advertising formats better ad standards 3. Support additional research using the methodology in other global regions to develop better ad standards and 4. Educate digital advertising industry participants on enhancing effectiveness and quality of consumer online advertising using these standards.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 32
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.7%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 37.2%; rating input score 37
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 4%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.81; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.7% of revenue deployed · 37.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $300K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $750K reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.