Sông Community Development Corporation
Legal name: Song Community Development Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 872962186
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New Orleans, LA, USA
- Phone
- 5042332313
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,123,849
- Expenses
- $862,887
- Assets
- $673,795
- Liabilities
- $36,774
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- Khai Nguyen (Co-Executive Dir.): $134,137 total reported compensation
- Tap Bui (Co-Executive Dir.): $113,200 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To build community power and advance racial, economic, and environmental justice in New Orleans East and beyond.
What it reported doing in 2024
Environment and Climate: Song Community Development Corporation advances environmental and climate resilience through community-based programs that center resident knowledge, practical learning, and long-term planning. Through initiatives such as Waters By-You and Resilient Algiers, Song CDC supports neighborhoods in understanding and responding to water-related climate challenges, including flooding, stormwater management, and environmental vulnerability. These efforts emphasize education, collaboration, and local leadership, recognizing that effective climate adaptation is rooted in place-based experience and community participation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 87
- Accountability: 21
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 57.6%; rating input score 58
- Program expense ratio: 69.6%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $25.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 90.2%; rating input score 90; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 23.2%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 28.7%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 57.6% of revenue deployed · 69.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $600K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $134K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.