Goosport Graveyard Endowment

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
726024035
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Lake Charles, LA, USA
Phone
7039738701
Rating
33
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$202,473
Expenses
$138,334
Assets
$3,714,700
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERIK JESSEN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MARGARET CUBBAGE (DIRECTOR)
  • GEORGE PARET III (DIRECTOR)
  • ERIK JESSEN (PRESIDENT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Care, maintenance and expansion of a cemetery.

What it reported doing in 2025

Donation to arts council of swla for lake charles cemetary tour

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31.7%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.85; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.