International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300509700
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
7039259455
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$172,035
Expenses
$194,340
Assets
$575,184
Liabilities
$56,462

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kerry Kinney (President)
  • Nicola Carslaw (President-Elect)

People named in this filing

  • Kerry Kinney (President)
  • Karen Dannemiller (VP Policy)
  • Jamie Bennett (VP Research)

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

Isiaq is an international multidisciplinary scientific nonprofit organization whose purpose is to support the creation of healthy, comfortable and productive indoor environments.

What it reported doing in 2025

Isiaq is an international, independent, multidisciplinary, scientific, non-profit organization whose purpose is to support the creation of healthy, comfortable, and productivity-encouraging indoor environments. Isiaq's role is to facilitate international and interdisciplinary communication and information exchange by publishing and fostering publication on indoor air quality and climate. Isiaq organizes, sponsors, and supports initiatives such as meetings, conferences, and seminars on indoor air quality and climate; and develops, adapts, and maintains guidelines for the improvement of indoor air quality and climate.isiaq serves a membership base of about 900 researchers and academics from around the world.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 73% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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 - Most voting board members are independent and revenue has grown recently. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.6%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 62.1%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: -13%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.96; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.6% of revenue deployed · 62.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $121K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $102K reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.