Regional Access Project Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 330547453
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Palm Desert, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7606749992
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Management & Technical Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,228,430
- Expenses
- $3,140,572
- Assets
- $6,851,424
- Liabilities
- $448,189
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
23 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LETICIA DE LARA (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- LETICIA DE LARA (CEO): $227,023 total reported compensation
- GEORGE HOLLIDAY (CONTROLLER): $75,874 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The regional access project foundation provides funding, oversight, technical assistance, and guidance to volunteers, community based organizations and agencies, and collaborative groups, which serve the residents of eastern riverside county in the areas of health, mental health, and juvenile interventions. The regional access project foundation's vision is to be a resource for these organizations and individuals in the desert communities preparing for and providing services in order to enable an enhanced quality of life for all inhabitants of eastern riverside county.
What it reported doing in 2024
Nonprofit organization centric (npoc) raps npoc program is the only program of its kind in eastern riverside county. Npoc provides professional services and support to nonprofit organizations in order to assist them with their capacity building efforts and to help them achieve financial sustainability. The following are examples of npoc services: providing nonprofit consultants with expertise in the following areas: board development, strategic planning, budgeting, marketing, financial planning, etc. Offering workshops in nonprofit capacity building topics including but not limited to: human resources, grant writing, grant research, budgeting, and financial management. Hosting the annual conference featuring an inspirational speaker to raise awareness of the nonprofit contributions to our community and providing networking opportunities. Provide affordable office space and free meeting space and copying services to nonprofits.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 74% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 76%; rating input score 76
- Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: $29.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 2nd 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: 98.2%; rating input score 98; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.18; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 76% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $227K · 23 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 40 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 32 filed related-organization links
- 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 44/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.