Greater New Orleans Afterschool Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261272143
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
New Orleans, LA, USA
Phone
5043049591
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,658,256
Expenses
$2,093,645
Assets
$512,396
Liabilities
$358,783

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lauren Bierbaum (Executive Director)
  • Scott Norris (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lauren Bierbaum (Executive Director): $95,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization helps school age youth in New Orleans maximize their learning opportunities and educational experiences during "out of school" time. We maintain strong connections between community groups, schools, government agencies, and families.

What it reported doing in 2013

ExpandED: Partnership for Youth Development (PYD) supports a national, multi-year expanded learning time effort called ExpandED Schools. ExpandED Schools bring together schools and community-based organizations to create a longer learning day with more opportunities for students. These schools offer both increased time for academics and the best of after-school programming, including enrichment, social supports, physical activity, and healthy snacks. PYD is working with three schools - Fannie C. Williams Charter School, Batiste Cultural Arts Academy (a RENEW school) and McDonogh 32 Literacy Charter School - to rethink their school day in order to boost student achievement and development. New Orleans is one of only three cities taking part in a national demonstration of ExpandED Schools, through a grant from our partners at The After-School Corporation (TASC, www.tascorp.org). Students at these three schools are getting academic help and high-quality enrichment in visual arts, dance, drumming, ballet, creative writing, band, flag football, cheerleading, recording and much more.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.2%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $78.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -26.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.7; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.5%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $95K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.