New Orleans Council for Community and Justice (Noccj)
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 412162126
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2015
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2015
- Location
- New Orleans, LA, USA
- Phone
- 5045223760
- Rating
- 64
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Professional Societies, Associations
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $128,411
- Expenses
- $104,777
- Assets
- $20,032
- Liabilities
- $8,700
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEPHANIE BRIDGES (PRESIDENT & CEO)
People named in this filing
- HARRY ROSENBERG (PRESIDING CO-CHAIR)
- M CLELAND POWELL III (CO-CHAIR)
- HILTON BELL (TREASURER)
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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
See schedule o.
What it reported doing in 2015
Transforming communities: noccj's goal is to transform communities to be more inclusive and just, and is summarized as follows: communal responsibility, break down barriers, value differences, and to provide a level playing field. Empowering leaders: including faith leaders, economic opportunity leaders, youth and emerging leaders, government leaders, education leaders, and news media and advertising leaders. Create institutional change: mentoring those who are different from us, respecting the value systems, and beliefs of institutions that disagree with yours, policies and practices are aligned to include those who are different.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 88% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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 revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 37
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 34.4%; rating input score 34
- Program expense ratio: 42.2%; rating input score 42
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.4%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.19; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -54.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 25.7% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 100.9% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 34.4% of revenue deployed · 42.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $44K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.