Livelikelou Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823524872
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oxford, OH, USA
Phone
5135236345
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,520,640
Expenses
$2,151,844
Assets
$3,186,629
Liabilities
$214,297

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WENDY FAUST (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • WENDY FAUST (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $178,596 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The live like lou foundation's mission is to create and connect communities to stimulate emerging als research and uniquely support families affected by lou gehrig's disease. Named in honor of mlb hall of famer lou gehrig, our vision is to leave als better than we found it by supporting families affected by lou gehrig's disease, funding emerging researchers seeking meaningful treatments and cures for als, and helping generate awareness of lou gehrig's disease for the more than 30,000 people currently living with als in north america. In the face of his diagnosis with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis als lou continued to live his life with courage, determination, and gratitude. This is what it means to live like lou.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided tuition support for dependents of als families to attend post-secondary educational institutions. Developed and operated volunteer programs that serve als families across north america. Provided respite grants to families living with als. Provided home modification grants to families to provide care for a family memberaffected by als.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 89% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 72.2%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.9%; rating input score 94; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -41.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.48; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.8% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 72.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $179K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.