New Schools for Baton Rouge
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 453843085
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Baton Rouge, LA, USA
- Phone
- 2253840271
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $17,669,187
- Expenses
- $5,647,598
- Assets
- $24,434,553
- Liabilities
- $161,748
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NOEMI DONOSO (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- KENNETH CAMPBELL (PAST PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- TRAVIS MARKEY (CFO): $179,077 total reported compensation
- KENNETH CAMPBELL (PAST PRESIDENT): $176,138 total reported compensation
- NOEMI DONOSO (PRESIDENT & CEO): $142,284 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
New schools for baton rouge's mission is to transform schools citywide to ensure there is an excellent school for every child in our city. As a community partnership nsbr is bringing together talent and resources that deliver excellent schools to students and families in baton rouge.
What it reported doing in 2024
Operating fund - general program servicesto create excellent schools for baton rouge students, new schools for baton rouge will:1) attract high-performing schools with strong track records of success to launch in baton rouge.2) expand organizations that produce the exceptional teachers and principals required to fuel transformational change.3) support an ecosystem of reform-oriented organizations needed for schools to succeed.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 83
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 30.3%; rating input score 30
- Program expense ratio: 91.1%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $348.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 95.1%; rating input score 95; 25th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 68%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.33; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 30.3% of revenue deployed · 91.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $179K · 22 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 13 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.