Coalition for Clean Air
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237120567
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 2132236860
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Pollution Abatement and Control Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,149,048
- Expenses
- $2,452,895
- Assets
- $1,518,894
- Liabilities
- $405,280
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Joseph K Lyou (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Joseph K Lyou (President & CEO): $186,766 total reported compensation
- Nicole R Roberts (Development Dir.): $110,270 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 protect public health, improve air quality and prevent climate change.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Coalition for Clean Air helped promote and improve air quality through education and advocacy efforts including (1) the reduction of air pollution from port and freight transportation activities (2) support for electric vehicles and other alternative fuel technologies and (3) climate change policies and programs that benefit California's most heavily-polluted communities. Coalition for Clean Air hosted California Clean Air Day, expanded its network of low-cost air quality monitors and worked with schools, community organizations, and community members on air quality and climate protection education.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 63
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 18
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 69.4%; rating input score 69
- Program expense ratio: 60.3%; rating input score 60
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -14.1%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.62; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 69.4% of revenue deployed · 60.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $187K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $752K reported
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.