Coalition Protecting Auto No-fault

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
731709753
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Lansing, MI, USA
Phone
5173319083
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$332,068
Expenses
$248,692
Assets
$236,220
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVE PONTONI (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARGARET KROESE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • NICHOLE SHOTWELL (DIRECTOR)
  • BILL SULLIVAN (DIRECTOR)
  • KRIS NICHOLOFF (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

Cpan is the consumer advocate for auto insurance policy holders, those who have been injured in a motor vehicle crash and other medical providers caring for them, representing them at the capitol, in the courts, and in the public forum.

What it reported doing in 2025

Cpan provided public awareness on the benefits of preserving the Michigan automobile no-fault system. It provided analysis of threats and efforts to reform the system. Grass roots advocacy training to members and non-members. Cpans efforts were successful in reaching out to the diability community, consumer groups, medical providers and rehabilitation providers. Education we provided by direct communication, sharing of information, website and general literature. Michigan requires all drivers to purchase no-fault automobile insurance. All Michigan drivers, passengers of automobiles and those injured as a result of an automobile accident benefit through cpans efforts to better educate.

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 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 - 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: 26
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 26.3%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 34.5%; rating input score 34
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 25.1%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 26.3% of revenue deployed · 34.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $86K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 22 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.