Criminal Justice Coordinating Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
833345765
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Phone
2253817098
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$833,836
Expenses
$993,150
Assets
$412,260
Liabilities
$67,897

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Christopher Csonka (Exec Director): $131,250 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 mission of the East Baton Rouge Criminal Justice Coordinating Council is to work less as individuals and more as a team, focusing on inclusion, collaboration, and data analysis to achieve a justice system that is fair and equitable for all residents of East Baton Rouge Parish.

What it reported doing in 2025

The CJCC operates a pre-trial diversion and recovery program through funding from the City of Baton Rouge and Parish of East Baton Rouge. The goal of this program is to provide safer, more effective alternatives to incarceration.The CJCC also operates various social reform initiatives including a Rapid Case Assessment Team (RCAT). This program is a collaborative partnership among key justice stakeholders who focus on case review, service connection and identifying racial, ethnic and socioeconomic disparities for newly arrested individuals charged with nonviolent misdemeanor and/or low-level felony offenses to ultimately reducethe average prison population and length of stay.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 61% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.3%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 7 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: Limited
    • 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: -19.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.2%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $877K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $131K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.