Letters to Strangers
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 830837546
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Jun 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2021
- Location
- Claremont, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9094155271
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $160,011
- Expenses
- $182,339
- Assets
- $269,963
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
People named in this filing
- Diana Chao (Executive Dir.)
- Amy Levin (Director)
- Pooja Mehta (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Letters to Strangers (L2S) is the largest global youth-run nonprofit seeking to destigmatize mental illness and increase access to affordable, quality treatment, particularly for youth*. We achieve our mission with a youth-run team in three main ways: Letter-Writing Our chapters (usually student clubs on campuses) write anonymous, heartfelt letters that aim to share their vulnerabilities and offer support for those who are fighting through difficult times. These letters are distributed either within Chapters, to other Chapters, or to community organizations called partner sites. We believe that writing is humanity distilled into ink. Individuals unaffiliated with our network can submit and exchange letters via our free, public online platform here.
What it reported doing in 2025
Support for domestic and international chapters to destigmatize youth mental health and increase affordable access (over 163,000 individuals impacted).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 53
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 55.6%; rating input score 56
- Program expense ratio: 48.7%; rating input score 49
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -14%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.48; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 32.9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 31.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 54% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 55.6% of revenue deployed · 48.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $89K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 49/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.