Good Work Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
721499442
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-T 2020
Location
New Orleans, LA, USA
Phone
5043092073
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$961,712
Expenses
$797,338
Assets
$1,759,845
Liabilities
$292,930

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HERMIONE MALONE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • HERMIONE MALONE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $140,630 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of good work network is to serve as a catalyst for minority- and women-owned business success. We envision an inclusive and equitable economy of diverse entrepreneurs with access to what they need to succeed. (continued on schedule o)established as a 501(c)3 in 2001, good work network is a provider of business development services for small, community-based businesses that support families and sustain communities. We serve as a catalyst for minority and women-owned business success.

What it reported doing in 2020

Education and entrepreneurship support services: good work network is a provider of business development services for small community-based businesses that support families and sustain communities. The network works to expand the local economy by building minority and women owned businesses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 37
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.7%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 46.5%; rating input score 47
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 17.1%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.21; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.6%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.7% of revenue deployed · 46.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $371K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $141K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.