Leaders for a Better Louisiana Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
721223265
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Phone
2253823750
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,591,171
Expenses
$1,561,058
Assets
$1,661,130
Liabilities
$1,134,205

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ADAM KNAPP (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ADAM KNAPP (CEO): $397,200 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To develop and connect leaders and citizens to drive transformative change for a better Louisiana. Through its work, the organization seeks to transform Louisiana into a dynamic, future-ready economy that offers every citizen and business the opportunity to thrive.

What it reported doing in 2025

Driving transformative change through data-driven policy advocacy, economic development strategy, and leadership empowerment. The organization focuses on advancing nonpartisan solutions to Louisiana's most pressing challenges while cultivating a statewide network of informed leaders committed to unlocking the state's full potential for all citizens.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.8%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 80.1%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 1.9%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.68; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.4%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.8% of revenue deployed · 80.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $397K · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.