Nola Business Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273654312
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
New Orleans, LA, USA
Phone
5049344500
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,743,763
Expenses
$4,447,471
Assets
$4,536,164
Liabilities
$1,347,528

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NORMAL BARNUM (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • NORMAL BARNUM (PRESIDENT/CE): $213,557 total reported compensation
  • LOUIS DAVID (INTERIM PRES): $145,263 total reported compensation
  • LYNETTE WHITE-COLIN (SENIOR VP SM): $143,663 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Charged by the city of new orleans with leading the economic recovery and development of orleans parish. The organization's focus is to grow the job base and secure private investment for orleans parish by attracting corporations for relocation, retaining existing business supporting expansion of existing businesses and develop retail growth. The organization accomplishes this by creating transparency and lowering the barriers to market entry.

What it reported doing in 2023

Nola business alliance implementation of their strategic neighborhood development launched a pilot program. This program helps support disinvestment communities of business and commercial corridors within seven neighborhood in orleans parish. The youth demonstration project is another program that prepares and connects individuals aged 16 through 24 to quality employment opportunities in higher wages, demand, and growth industries. Advancing cities program works with multi-agency collaborative agencies and community stakeholders to develop investment strategies in the burgeoning blue-green infrastructure industry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.2%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 75.9%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 16th 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.5%; rating input score 97; 34th 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; 64th 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: Fail
    • 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: -18.8%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.02; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.3%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.2% of revenue deployed · 75.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $214K · 24 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.