Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953854152
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2139777500
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Legal Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$19,672,490
Expenses
$15,911,473
Assets
$30,563,407
Liabilities
$3,436,621

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

Leadership & pay

40 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CONNIE CHUNG JOE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • RICHARD CROWE (VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE)
  • CORILEE KAHEALANI ASUNCION RACELA (VICE PRESIDENT OF PROGRAMS)
  • JANICE TSAO THRU 0324 (VICE PRESIDENT, ADMINISTRATION)

Highest reported compensation

  • CONNIE CHUNG JOE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $259,579 total reported compensation
  • RICHARD CROWE (VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE): $246,488 total reported compensation
  • AILEEN A LOUIE (CHIEF OF STAFF/CHIEF TRANSFORMATION OFFICER): $245,222 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ajsocal is a social justice organization that protects and strengthens the rights and dignity of asian american and pacific islander (aapi) communities, especially those that are most disadvantaged.

What it reported doing in 2024

Advocated for policies to maintain and expand the welfare/health safety net for apa immigrants and refugees, to increase accessibility of welfare/health programs for these groups, and provide community education and technical assistance to apa community organizations and individuals to engage in education and advocacy, provided technical assistance, demographic research, and advocacy on voting rights for apa voters promoted apa and immigrant rights through policy advocacy, education, outreach and coalition building.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.8%; rating input score 97; 26th 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; 66th 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: 19.1%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.92; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $12.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $260K · 40 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $348K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 39 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 55 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 46 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.