Leadership Education for Asian Pacifics Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953879677
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2134851422
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Leadership Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,679,714
Expenses
$1,944,506
Assets
$1,652,274
Liabilities
$709,730

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LINDA AKUTAGAWA (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • LINDA AKUTAGAWA (PRESIDENT & CEO): $182,742 total reported compensation
  • GRACE TOY (SVP, ADMINISTRATION & CFO): $151,816 total reported compensation
  • ALEXANDER M CENA (CHIEF PROGRAMS OFFICER): $130,320 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Leap's mission is to achieve full participation and equality for asian and pacific islanders through leadership, empowerment and policy.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community development institute/empowering communities: comprehensive leadership training, organizational development and capacity building programs presented through an asian and pacific island (api) cultural lens to develop the next generation of community leaders, to strengthen the effectiveness of existing community-based organizations and to establish a supportive network for mutual assistance, resource sharing and collaborative problem solving. In fiscal year 2024-2025, programs included 1) leap impact, a hybrid virtual/in-person program designed to strengthen the sustainability of nonprofit organizations. Participants included 10 senior managers and staff. Each participant gained 40 hours of leadership development training and eight hours of one-on-one executive coaching. In addition, a leap impact alumni event was delivered for three days of learning, re-energizing, and re-connecting for 24 nonprofit leaders in los angeles. 2) leap engage, a hybrid/in-person program for 7 nonprofit executive directors from across the USA. Each executive director gained 64 hours of leadership development training and 6 hours of one-on-one executive coaching. The cohort's final project, the giving tank was a pitch presentation by each participant to a panel representing an array of philanthropic donors and funders. 3)the emerge program for college students has transitioned to a fellowship model that follows the academic year, expanding the opportunity for selected students to engage more deeply in leadership development and community impact. With more time during the academic year, students will have additional opportunities for leadership practice, community engagement, and collaborative projects that continue to amplify api voices and experiences. In fiscal year 2024-2025, the emerge fellowship was in a design and planning phase. In the previous emerge programs, summer interns spent 200 hours over eight weeks engaged in leadership training and hands-on experience at community-based organizations across the united states. As part of the program, interns developed and collaborated on a group project. Donated in-kind travel of $14,185 and for facilities $2,600

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.1%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 67.1%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.62 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: -15.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.85; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.1% of revenue deployed · 67.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $183K · 19 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.