Coalition for Liberty Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882759129
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Phone
7044092412
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Censorship, Freedom of Speech and Press

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$483,182
Expenses
$358,321
Assets
$103,893
Liabilities
$41,279

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUG TURPIN (CEO/DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • DOUG TURPIN (CEO/DIRECTOR)
  • JAMES H PRICE (DIRECTOR)
  • STEVEN F MANZ (DIRECTOR)

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

Coalition for liberty, inc. (coalition) was formed to promote freedom of speech, advance education, and to promote parental involvement in primary and secondary education. The coalition believes that freedom of speech is vital to giving students a sound basic education. Educators and speakers in academic settings must be given the freedom to express differing viewpoints in order to simulate debate and creative thought. In addition, teachers should seek to provide students with a rich assortment of viewpoints and ideas to provoke thought and respect for the opinion of others. The coalition will fund programs and organizations dedicated to protecting free speech and publicly outline actions by faculty groups, school administrators and school boards that both inhibit and promote free speech. It will oppose and highlight the dangers of cancel culture, which seeks to quiet differing opinions.

What it reported doing in 2025

The second program service within our nonprofit is supporting grassroots organizations, where we created two online searchable directories of nonprofit organizations that list what each organization's main focus is and what they offer, and we are attempting to match those who have resources with those who need them. The two directories are the liberty directory, which focuses on traditional nonprofit grassroots groups, think tanks, donors, media organizations, groups that provide services and support to nonprofits, legally oriented nonprofit groups, and attorneys who will provide discounted or pro bono services to nonprofits. The second directory is the alliance directory, which is dedicated to creating a network of organizations to fight antisemitism. The purpose of both directory's is to foster collaboration and help those with resources connect with those who have them. By understanding the missions and objectives of these groups, we are able to match them up with each other for networking and support. We have also attended events where individual organizations are present to assist them with protecting their members' rights to free speech, raising money, or collaborating with others, obtaining training, resources, and other support for their groups, or assisting them with starting schools or enhancing educational opportunities for children. In 2025, we attended events such as the state policy network. We created an online relational database of organizations that provide funding, training, and support for grassroots organizations and individuals with the purpose of trying to get support from those who have it with those who need it. We did the same for the alliance directory that unites jews and christians in a fight against antisemitism.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.4%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 67.9%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.8%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -43.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.4% of revenue deployed · 67.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $243K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.