Latino Educational Achievement Partnership (LEAP)

Legal name: Latino Educational Achievement Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462545659
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Durham, NC, USA
Phone
9193901891
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Kindergarten, Preschool, Nursery School, Early Admissions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$379,365
Expenses
$352,943
Assets
$101,275
Liabilities
$574

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Megan McCurley (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Megan McCurley (Executive Director): $52,161 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Latino Educational Achievement Partnership (LEAP) empowers children in Durham to achieve academic success by providing a high-quality, dual-language preschool and on-going support throughout middle school.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2024-25, LEAPs Dual Language Preschool, Nuestra Escuelita engaged 49 three and four year old students in a project-based bilingual curriculum. Each year we implement an evaluation of our students skills compared across the school year against nationally normed standards. Only 3% of our 4yr old students began the year with average or above average skill levels across domains for their age, 96% left LEAP with the skills needed to be successful in kindergarten. This year, 92% of our students identified as Latinx and 88% were medicaid eligible.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 61% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.23 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 7%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.8%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 74% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $281K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.