Onpath Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202258602
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Metairie, LA, USA
Phone
5047331733
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Emergency Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$114,172
Expenses
$293,002
Assets
$2,738,759
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CANDACE WASHINGTON (PRESIDENT)
  • JAY HUFFSTATLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CANDACE WASHINGTON (PRESIDENT): $253,821 total reported compensation
  • DORA SHORT (EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT): $61,798 total reported compensation
  • JAY HUFFSTATLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $12,678 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

It is the mission of the onpath foundation to fund and support community initiatives that seek to create generational wealth. By acting as a catalyst in creating opportunities, the foundation will work to help individuals and families build long-term financial stability, security, and to create opportunities for future generations to thrive.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community sponsorships and partnerships to increase foundation awareness and impact in underserved areas. Onpath also provided scholarships to high school seniors totaling $9,000 and monetary support for other nonprofits and sponsorship opportunities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th 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: 80%; rating input score 80; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -156.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.35; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.5%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.6% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $293K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $254K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.