National Association of Asian American Professionals Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113490724
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Lawrenceville, GA, USA
Phone
9196251207
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$240,752
Expenses
$563,287
Assets
$241,088
Liabilities
$13,201

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VINCENT PINEDA (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FORM JAN TO AUG 2025)
  • WILLIAM LEONG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR UNTIL JANUARY 2025)
  • NEWLYN WING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR STARTED AUGUST 2025)

Highest reported compensation

  • VINCENT PINEDA (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FORM JAN TO AUG 2025): $15,000 total reported compensation
  • WILLIAM LEONG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR UNTIL JANUARY 2025): $7,500 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 national association of asian american professionals is a non-profit organization that cultivates and empowers asian & pacific islander leaders through leadership development, professional networking, and community service.

What it reported doing in 2025

Leadership convention - the leadership convention by naaap brings together over 700 asian american and pacific islander (aapi) leaders and allies for professional development, networking, and community building. It consists of 3 days of conference programming, focused on dei and leadership development type of programming. The event also hosts a career fair and evening gala.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 75.9%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -134%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 75.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $428K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $15K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.