Society for the Preservation of DTLA

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474813594
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$4,415
Assets
$44,513

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Greg Lev (President)

People named in this filing

  • Greg Lev (President)
  • Bill Cooper (Treasurer)
  • Justin Riley (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Society for the Preservation of Downtown Los Angeles is dedicated to enforcing the highest standards in architecture and urban planning, inspiring best practices to serve the overall public good, promoting green space, and preserving physical and visual access to historic districts and landmarks. As this community of residents, business owners and visitors continues to blossom, our organization strives to preserve the unique and protected architectural gems of Downtown Los Angeles, define a zone of respect for its iconic buildings and landmarks, promote sensible urban planning, and to protect its exceptional culture and history. We call for a thoughtful balance between the past and the present, between the iconic buildings of yesterday and the bold hi-rises of tomorrow. We welcome the kind of development that brings density and prosperity to downtown Los Angeles, while preserving the integrity of its historic landscape.

What it reported doing in 2025

Opposed existing designs for the Alexan apartment building so that they would adhere to the Historic Core design guidelines as set up by the LA Conservancy and adopted by the city of Los Angeles. This was in order to keep the building in context with the rest of the historic core.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.08; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -129.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -52.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.