Louisiana Infrastructure Technical Assistance Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920692643
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Phone
3186807387
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,392,945
Expenses
$1,488,293
Assets
$188,795
Liabilities
$160,830

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LESLIE DURHAM (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • GUY CORMIER (DIRECTOR): $330,268 total reported compensation
  • BARNEY ARCENEAUX (DIRECTOR): $191,216 total reported compensation
  • LESLIE DURHAM (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $180,678 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 primary purpose of the corporation is to provide technical assistance and support to Louisiana's municipal and parish governments in applying for federal and state funding through grants, loans, and other available sources.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Louisiana infrastructure technical assistance corporation (litacorp), a nonprofit organization, was established in october 2022 as a collaborative partnership between the Louisiana municipal association (lma) and the police jury association of Louisiana (pjal) to advance three key goals: 1.) equip political subdivisions located in rural and economically distressed areas with the tools and resources they need to identify, apply for, and administer federal grants funded through the infrastructure investment and jobs act (iija). 2.) minimize barriers for political subdivisions to access federal resources by assisting them with meeting local cost share requirements of federal grant programs funded through iija. 3.) acquire federal grant funds through iija to construct, improve, or repair public infrastructure water and sewer systems, roads, bridges, railways, ports, broadband, etc. In rural and economically distressed communities throughout Louisiana.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 71
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.13; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.85; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -62.4% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $330K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.