League of Terre Haute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
356041516
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Terre Haute, IN, USA
Phone
5742262889
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Urban League

Reported finances

Revenue
$73,967
Expenses
$40,681
Assets
$266,897

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KELSEY GRIGSBY (President)
  • JERI CASASSA (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • KELLY RONAN (Treasurer)
  • KELSEY GRIGSBY (President)
  • JERI CASASSA (Vice 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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We are a nonprofit organization dedicated to children. Founded in 1928 by a group of local women, League has impacted the lives of thousands of children and families in Vigo County and the Wabash Valley. The League has two core missions: Clothes Closet and Dental Education and Extended Services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided dental service/education and clothing/supplies for needy children.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.3%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 45%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.56; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.3% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $34K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.