Great Leap Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953337990
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3108501287
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Reported finances

Revenue
$226,163
Expenses
$122,590
Assets
$234,803
Liabilities
$2,492

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Meryl Marshall-Daniels (President)
  • Clara Chiu (Vice-President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Nobuko Miyamoto (Ex- Officio): $15,079 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To use art and artists to foster understanding between communities.

What it reported doing in 2022

Great Leap artists shared artistic work, served as experts on panels online as well as live events. Great Leap artists were part of digital and live events commemorate the 80th Anniversary of US Executive Order 9066 that incarcerated Japanese Americans during World War II with Asahi TV and the Smithsonian Musemum. The Artistic Director created a new Obon song for the Buddist Churches of American Obon Dances across the Country. Additionally, we participated in educational classroom visits with middle school, high school and college students. And finally, our artistic director was part of the 40th Anniversary of the Vincent Chin Remembrance. In 2022 Great Leap served 10,000 audience members across digital platforms and live events.

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 100% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.7%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 75.1%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 45.8%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.92; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.7% of revenue deployed · 75.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $92K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $15K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.