San Diego Alliance for Traffic Relief Reliable Transit & Jobs

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
871897407
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Long Beach, CA, USA
Phone
9164422952
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,466,783
Expenses
$2,478,299
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUG HICKS (President)

People named in this filing

  • DOUG HICKS (President)
  • VAL MACEDO (DIRECTOR)
  • GRETCHEN NEWSOM (SEC/TREASURER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The specific purpose of this association is to educate the public regarding the benefits of approving a ballot measure to increase the rate of the transactions and use tax in San Diego County for purposes of providing a long-term revenue stream to fund transportation relief and safety projects in the County, and to ensure high quality, good paying jobs in the region.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization spearhead a robust community outreach program on the benefits of voting to approve an initiative ordinance increasing the local sales tax to fund essential San Diego County transportation improvements. The revenue raised by the proposed ordinance would fund infrastructure repairs, including retrofits and safety upgrades to aging bridges, storm drains and rail lines, as well as expand San Diegos public transit system. The organization worked with community stakeholders to educate voters by digital, television, and print media as well as a strong door knocking campaign. The organization previously worked to gather signatures to qualify the measure (Measure G) for the November 5, 2024 election. Unfortunately, the voters voted not to enact Measure G by a narrow 50.46% to 49.54% margin.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.4%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 94%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $532.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd 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: -0.5%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 63.6% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 79% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -148.7% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.4% of revenue deployed · 94% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $2.2M reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.