Baton Rouge Alliance for Students Action

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
862832019
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Phone
2252579091
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,600,922
Expenses
$1,137,973
Assets
$2,239,415
Liabilities
$730,371

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ADONICA Y PELICHET DUGGAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • ADONICA Y PELICHET DUGGAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $261,089 total reported compensation
  • ELIZABETH SMITH (CHIEF STRATEGY OFFICER): $178,482 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 alliance was created to ensure that students are at the forefront of school improvement decisions in baton rouge and that a diverse coalition of families, civic leaders, elected officials, and business leaders from across the parish are engaged in driving a prosperous future for students in ebr.

What it reported doing in 2025

The baton rouge alliance for students action seeks to empower families, engage leaders and elevate communities through programming in a number of areas serving the community. Additionally, we operate a parent academy to help parents become better partners in their children's education. Our candidates and campaigners program assists community members who are interested in considering elected service in understanding the components of effective leadership and campaigns through a seven-month free training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.4%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 65.3%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $42.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 28.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.97; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.4% of revenue deployed · 65.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $744K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $261K · 6 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.