Orange County Asian and Pacific Islander Community Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912047245
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Garden Grove, CA, USA
Phone
7146369095
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,292,778
Expenses
$15,398,005
Assets
$14,312,563
Liabilities
$4,309,656

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARY ANNE FOO MPH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALEXANDER H TRUONG (PSYCHIATRIST): $238,593 total reported compensation
  • MARY ANNE FOO MPH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $237,358 total reported compensation
  • THUONG-PHUONG A NGUYEN (PSYCHIATRIST): $234,520 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ocapica's mission is to build a healthier and stronger community by enhancing the well-being of asians and pacific islanders through inclusive partnerships in the areas of service, education, advocacy, organizing, and research.

What it reported doing in 2025

Cdss stop the hateocapica was chosen by the California department of social services to be the regional lead for orange county and inland empire (riverside and san bernardino counties) for the stop the hate initiative. The stop the hate funding came from the asian and pacific islander legislative caucus's aapi equity funding. Ocapica manages twenty subcontracts with nonprofit organizations conducting anti-hate work in orange county and the inland empire. The program includes direct, prevention, and intervention services, such as outreach and education, hate crime prevention, reporting education, victims' assistance, arts and culture-based approaches to healing, legislative education, cultural competency trainings, collaborations to change institutional systems, mental health services, and more. Funds were distributed to organizations serving vulnerable populations, including agencies working with aapi, black, lgbtq+, indigenous/native, monolingual, immigrant, refugee, formerly incarcerated, and youth communities, with funds allocated to specifically support bi- or multi-lingual providers. Funding enables ocapica to support the partner organizations by building their administrative and programmatic capacity, managing financial and programmatic reporting, collaborating with statewide regional leads, and convening grantees for strategic coalition and partnership-building. Ocapica provided 13 subcontracts in orange county and 7 subcontracts in inland empire for a total amount of $1,362,200.a combined 1,113,879 clients over 11,418 sessions have been served by grantees in the 2025 calendar year. 964,490 community members were outreached to via 1,145 events. 17,982 unduplicated clients received direct one-on-one mental health or healing services. 84,686 community members attended at least one of 2,218 prevention-based workshops. 46,721 community members and policy makers were reached through at least one of 692 trainings, listening circles, or general meetings to generate systems change through intervention.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 86% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 90.4%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $63.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 21st 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: 5.5%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.2% of revenue deployed · 90.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $13.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $239K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.