SMILE Community Action Agency

Legal name: St Martin Iberia Lafayette Parish Community Action Agency

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
720648848
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lafayette, LA, United States
Phone
(337) 234-3272
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,266,234
Expenses
$8,068,966
Assets
$1,934,260
Liabilities
$919,847

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CRAIG MATHEWS (CEO)
  • VONDA LEBLANC (Vice President)
  • RONALD CORMIER (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • CRAIG MATHEWS (CEO): $166,171 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

SMILE Community Action Agency serves as a clearinghouse for community needs, with a focus on health, education, economic stability, and the betterment of all disadvantaged individuals, children and families that we encounter. Lafayette Emergency Assistance Program (LEAP) Provides rental assistance on behalf of eligible tenants, including households and single occupants. Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) Provides direct payments to home energy suppliers on behalf of eligible households, particularly the elderly and disabled. Community Services Block Grant Program (CSBG) Provides support services for community-based, anti-poverty programs and projects, such as emergency assistance, transportation, housing and weatherization.

What it reported doing in 2024

Home energy assistance provides direct utility payments to home energy suppliers on behalf of eligible households particularly the elderly and disabled.in this fiscal year 14,690 clients were assisted with their utility bills

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 88% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 72% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 41
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 92.3%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 2nd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.4%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.1%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 13th 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: 90.1% of revenue deployed · 92.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $7.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $166K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.