Association for Progressive Communications

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943287156
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4155617824
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,745,006
Expenses
$10,055,142
Assets
$13,057,467
Liabilities
$6,521,972

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CONCEPCION RAMILO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAREN BANKS (OPERATIONS DIRECTOR): $124,674 total reported compensation
  • CONCEPCION RAMILO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $122,666 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Apc's mission is to empower and support organisations, social movements and individuals in and through the use of information and communication technologies (icts) to build strategic communities and initiatives for the purpose of making meaningful contributions to equitable human development, social justice, participatory political processes and environmental sustainability.

What it reported doing in 2024

Global advocacy and policy (gaps)- leads global internet governance and human rights policy advocacy. Program service fees are an important aspect for the continuation of the program.cummunications unit - the communications team manages apc's online and offline external communications, publicity, social media presence, websites and publications, including outreach to apc's members, partners and the media, to strategically contribute to furthering apc's advocacy objectives. Program service fees are an important aspect for the continuation of the program.technical unit - the technical systems and support team provides the necessary technical infrastucture and support for apc programmes, projects, staff and members to operate in stable, secure and reliable online spaces. Program service fees are an important aspect for the continuation of the program.network development - the netdev team works closely with apc members and associates and staff as well as with close partners and collaborating networks to foster the development of a strong, sustainable and vibrant network. The team leads the work around new memberships and resource sharing within the network (including granting). Program service fees are an important aspect for the continuation of the program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 34.8%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 53.4%; rating input score 53
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • 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: 27.8%; rating input score 28; 9th 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: 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36.1%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.3; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.5%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.8% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 34.8% of revenue deployed · 53.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $125K · 9 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $225K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 35/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.