Louisiana Cannabis Industry Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464832436
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Zachary, LA, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$841
Expenses
$812
Assets
$627
Liabilities
$625

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHEW MOREAU (President)

People named in this filing

  • Michael Moreau (OFFICER)
  • MATTHEW MOREAU (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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to advance the cause of medical cannabis in Louisiana by advocating for its constituents, collaborating with the medical community to disseminate facts, and working with agricultural interests to safely produce and efficiently distribute this therapeutic botanical.

What it reported doing in 2018

The organization focused on policy development/public relations, education, policy document creation, and lobbying. Our public relations work consisted of members and volunteers drafting press releases, social media posts, and public speaking. The organization's education aspect focuses on providing accurate information about cannabis and cannabis policy to lawmakers and the general public using various outlets and face to face meetings. Policy documentation requires a great deal of time and resources and is directly related to achieving public relations and educaction goals. The organizations lobbying efforts entailed directly engaging the legistlative and executive branches of Louisiana's government to discuss cannabis policy.

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
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.4%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -138.5% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 70.1% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2016 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.