Greater Baton Rouge Economic Partnership Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
721270359
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Phone
2253817125
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Business and Industry

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,160,362
Expenses
$1,561,964
Assets
$11,986,645
Liabilities
$2,446,999

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

67 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LORI MELANCON (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • ANN TRAPPEY (INTERIM CEO)
  • MICHAEL DIRESTO (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREW FITZGERALD (SR. VICE PRESIDENT-BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE)
  • EMILIA P HENRY (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF INVESTOR DEVELOPMENT)
  • RUSSELL RICHARDSON (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RUSSELL RICHARDSON (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT): $260,524 total reported compensation
  • LORI MELANCON (PRESIDENT/CEO): $244,212 total reported compensation
  • BRACE GODFREY (SR VP OF POLICY): $195,502 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 benefit and increase the quality of life of the general public in and around the baton rouge area by promoting and supporting activities and functions that attract business, educate the public, and create jobs that otherwise tend to increase economic growth and development in the region.

What it reported doing in 2024

The leadership baton rouge program, part of the national community leadership association, is designed to seek out and educate leaders in the baton rouge community by enhancing the participants' leadership skills, capacities, and attitudes while broadening their understanding of community issues.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent 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: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 45.5%; rating input score 46
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 66.3%; rating input score 66; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 97.9%; rating input score 98; 27th 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.7%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.67; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.8%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.6% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33% of revenue deployed · 45.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 46 of 47 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $711K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $261K · 67 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 21 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.