Pacific Links Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943397768
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Milpitas, CA, USA
Phone
5104353035
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Promotion of International Understanding

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,728,094
Expenses
$1,564,356
Assets
$4,424,445
Liabilities
$51,099

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • 1 Diep Vuong (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • 1 Diep Vuong (President): $127,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Mission is: To support the sustainable development of Vietnamese communities and the enrichment of their cultural heritage.

What it reported doing in 2024

AN GIANG/DONG THAP ALLIANCE FOR THE PREVENTION OF TRAFFICKING (ADAPT) Counter-Trafficking programs invest comprehensively in at-risk youth to prevent trafficking before it starts, and in survivors to help them reclaim their lives. We work throughout Vietnam in trafficking hotspots and collaborate with partner organizations in destination countries, including those in Asia and Europe. Our multi-pronged, grassroots anti-trafficking initiatives include (1) prevention services to empower through education and knowledge (including empowering female migrant workers in the supply chain); (2) protection services for trafficking survivors to empower self-confidence and independence; and (3) partnerships for long-term solutions through collaborations to prevent trafficking in school-based, factory-based, and community-based settings.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.9%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $30.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42.7%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.83; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.1%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.9% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $127K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.