Jacobs Color Link Initiative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463898738
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2013
Location
New Orleans, LA, USA
Phone
8009217839
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$259,097
Expenses
$303,692
Assets
$136,017
Liabilities
$6

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIRSTEN J VASELAAR (CHAIRPERSON/ PRESIDENT)
  • THOMAS J LANDRY II (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS J LANDRY II (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $122,366 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

JCLI's core mission is to Empower, Inspire, and Advocate for persons with disabilities in Haiti. Inspired by its namesake, Jacob Richard, JCLI envisions a world where persons with disabilities are Thriving, Contributing, and Realizing their full potential. JCLI will focus on programming that provides learning opportunities for persons with disabilities (PWDs) so that their lives are less dependent on others, charity. JCLI believes its programming will also provide for a change in peoples attitudes towards PWDs by seeing their impact on society.

What it reported doing in 2016

Camp Jacob 2016 - JCLI hosted numerous disabled Haitians at a 7-day summer camp designed to make the most of their abilities. This was JCLI's sole program in 2016.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.4%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 40.4%; rating input score 40
  • Fundraising efficiency: $264.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.2%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 40.3%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25.1% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 44% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.4% of revenue deployed · 40.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $123K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $122K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2015 to 2016
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.