Access Psychology Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
871843619
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
White Plains, NY, USA
Phone
9148100163
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$749,821
Expenses
$745,813
Assets
$854,675
Liabilities
$333,357

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALEC L MILLER (PRESIDENT)
  • LATA K MCGINN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DAMIAN TRAVIER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAMIAN TRAVIER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $182,203 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To overcome behavioral health disparities that exist among racially diverse and underserved populations by increasing access to evidence-based prevention, treatment, training and education.

What it reported doing in 2024

The access psychology foundation (apf) offers scholarships and grants to individuals from historically underrepresented populations for a) training in psychology as well as b) evidence-based psychological treatments. Graduate students, licensed professionals, schools, and organizations from historically underrepresented populations gain exposure to the field of evidence-based clinical psychology and access high quality training and consultation. In addition, apf financially supports individuals and families from underserved communities to obtain cutting edge, evidence-based mental health treatment.

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 95% 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: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.1%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 48.3%; rating input score 48
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.15; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.39; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 36.6% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.1% of revenue deployed · 48.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $360K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $182K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.