One Warm Coat
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 743045243
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4157181887
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,858,471
- Expenses
- $5,756,399
- Assets
- $2,064,525
- Liabilities
- $41,826
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BETH AMODIO (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- BETH AMODIO (President & CEO): $173,061 total reported compensation
- Patti Zappa (Executive VP): $120,317 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide free coats to children and adults in need while promoting volunteerism and environmental sustainability.
What it reported doing in 2025
One Warm Coat provided 480,634 free coats to children and adults in need through a network of more than 1,900 nonprofit partner organizations across the United States. Most coats distributed were gently worn items collected through 5,365 volunteer-led coat drives organized in communities nationwide. In addition, One Warm Coat distributed new outerwear donated through its Zero Waste Initiative, which accepts overstock, irregular, and excess inventory from retailers and manufacturers. Through these combined programs, One Warm Coat not only helped meet a critical need for warmth but also diverted more than 1.2 million pounds of textiles from landfills during the year.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 91% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91.9%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 93.4%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: $30.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 14th 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: 32.3%; rating input score 32; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.7%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.1%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 91.9% of revenue deployed · 93.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $173K · 16 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 13 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 32/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.