Union of Pan Asian Communities
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237279074
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- San Diego, CA, USA
- Phone
- 6192326454
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $17,085,032
- Expenses
- $18,329,581
- Assets
- $6,221,502
- Liabilities
- $3,594,391
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARGARET IWANAGA PENROSE (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- RONA HAUSSER (NURSE PRACTIONER): $230,300 total reported compensation
- ORIANA HASHEMI-TOROGHI (NURSE PRACTIONER): $227,944 total reported compensation
- KAREN TRACY COLLICA (NURSE PRACTIONER): $169,151 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To improve the general well-being and education of the asian, pacific islander and other ethnic communities of san diego county. Upac recognizes the diverse ethnic and cultural identities and strengths of these communities and their need for self-sufficiency.
What it reported doing in 2024
Community county-wide violence response team (ccvrt) provides needed support and services to victims of and witnesses to community violence in order to mitigate the negative effects of violence in a manner that is culturally appropriate. Supportive services include, but not limited to, therapeutic support, short-term system navigation assistance, case management, crisis intervention, grief counseling, as well as linkages and referrals to community partners and other needed services. Cvrt will also provide supports and interventions that are designed to build and/or increase community resiliency and combat the negative effects of violence. Cvrt will also aim to enhance the skills of providers, schools, community-based and faith-based organizations to ensure coordinated and neighborhood response to gang/community violence. During the fiscal year ended on june 30, 2025, we served 684 unduplicated clients and 240 pre-existing direct services clients, 3,448 reponses hours, and 1,173 client outreach hours, 17 number of community events, 1,885 client briefing hours. Youth success initiative (ysi) is a mentoring program designed to provide meaningful and impacting mentorship to two categories of youth - gang involved and at risk. Youth are screened and assessed and then matched with diverse mentors based on the youth's strengths and interests. The activities may involve many interactions including academic, social, recreational, and employment. In addition to the youth mentorship component, youth success initiative also provides walk and knocks to three target areas of san diego logan heights, city heights, and southeast san diego. Walk and knocks are led by ysi and involve collaboration with other community agencies and law enforcement that provide resources and information directly to the neighborhoods going house-to-house of these target areas. In addition, community forums are held in each region that provides a venue for community members to discuss important matters that impact their families and neighborhood and receive support from the youth success initiative team and their partners. During the fiscal year ended on june 30th, 2025, we mentored 100 youth, 100 unduplicated youth, provided 16 community forums, and conducted 24 walk and knocks.the neighborhood enterprise center (nec) and timmy's place pizzeria and print are social enterprise programsrevenue generating businesses with a social mission. When you eat and shop at nec and timmy's place you receive quality food and merchandise and help improve the lives of san diego youth! All revenue generated from each social enterprise goes into the on-going operation of the program, providing jobs and opportunities for at-risk youth.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 16
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.2%; rating input score 96
- Program expense ratio: 89.7%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $18.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 23rd 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; 66th 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: -7.3%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 96.2% of revenue deployed · 89.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $16.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $230K · 13 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $403K reported
- Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.