AIDS Project Los Angeles

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953842506
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2132011600
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,540,817
Expenses
$9,448,361
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CRAIG E THOMPSON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • CRAIG E THOMPSON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $338,952 total reported compensation
  • ROBYN GOLDMAN (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $217,443 total reported compensation
  • CHARLES ROBBINS (ADVANCEMENT DIRECTOR END 10/17): $173,599 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to achieve health care equity and promote well-being for the lgbt and other underserved communities and people living with and affected by HIV.

What it reported doing in 2017

Capacity building and technical assistance - shared action is a capacity building assistance (cba) program that works to strengthen the capacity of HIV prevention within cdc-funded health departments to optimize planning, implementation and sustainability of high-impact prevention interventions. The cba model reflects three different levels of service delivery including: 1) information and technology transfer, 2) training for skills-building and 3) individualized capacity building assistance. See schedule o for additional information.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.4%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 95%; rating input score 95; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 74.5%; rating input score 75; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: 18.1%; rating input score 84; 84th 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: 10%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.4% of revenue deployed · 71.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $339K · 25 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1M reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2011 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.