Apparel Impact Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455146805
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
6509954662
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,755,200
Expenses
$11,802,136
Assets
$19,889,893
Liabilities
$6,423,040

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LEWIS PERKINS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LEWIS PERKINS (PRESIDENT): $331,961 total reported compensation
  • KAY E BLOOMBERG (CHIEF OF STAFF): $270,071 total reported compensation
  • KURT R KIPKA (CHIEF IMPACT OFFICER): $255,743 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To identify, validate, fund and scale impact solutions to drive measurable change in the apparel and footwear industry. Aii programs focus on areas that result in positive environmental impact from the production of apparel and footwear products to improve the industry.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization will drive transformative improvements in the fashion industry through innovative funding mechanisms and deep partnerships with industry and other professional services. This collaboration will select, fund, and scale high-impact projects that dramatically and measurably improve sustainability outcomes of the apparel and footwear industry. The organization identifies projects within the apparel and footwear industry that, with appropriate investment and resources, have the potential to scale to meet the critical environmental and social outcomes brands and consumers are both seeking.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 67% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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 - A large share of total spending goes to programs and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.4%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 76.8%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $53.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.6%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.69; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.1%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 34.4% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 28.8% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.9% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.4% of revenue deployed · 76.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $332K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $270K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.