American Lithuanian National Center of Los Angeles

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
952543903
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
8054416035
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Reported finances

Revenue
$90,750
Expenses
$47,400
Assets
$715,689
Liabilities
$9,195

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AL PECHULIS (PRESIDENT)
  • DAINA KASPUTIS (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MARIUS ANELAUKAS (TREASURER)
  • AL PECHULIS (PRESIDENT)
  • DAINA KASPUTIS (VICE PRESIDENT)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The primary purpose for which this corporation is formed is to promote, develop, cultivate, and encourage lithuanian national virtues; to educate the youth in arts and cultural aspirations, to encourage social exchanges among its members; and operate exclusively for charitable, religious, and educational purposes, including, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations described under section 501c3 of the internal revenue code or corresponding section of any future federal tax code and fulfill the stated purposes and goals of this corporation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Social club - provides low-cost meeting facilities for members

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 80% for direct work, and 20% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.4%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • 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: 47.8%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.1; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.4% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $47K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.