United Way of Southwest Louisiana Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
720456901
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lake Charles, LA, USA
Phone
3374331088
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,052,212
Expenses
$4,723,914
Assets
$16,146,849
Liabilities
$834,193

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Denise Durel (PresidentChief Executive Officer): $233,664 total reported compensation
  • Jennifer Dimas (Director of Finance): $108,246 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 unite our community by funding programs in the areas of education, income and health. Our goal is to create long-lasting change that prevents problems from happening in the first place. Our community is the 5 parish area of Allen, Beauregard, Calcasieu, Cameron and Jeff Davis.

What it reported doing in 2024

Support of Community Initiatives, Disaster Management, Case Management and Other Programs - United Way of Southwest Louisiana is looking at the big picture - embracing the entire circle of life focusing on children and youth, families and neighborhoods, seniors, and people rebuilding their lives. We know that the big picture includes us all. That is why in addition to funding agency partners, we provide our own programs including supporting victims of Hurricane Ida, Hurricane Laura, and also support other community-led initiatives such as the Community Helpline, 2-1-1 referral systems, Disaster Response, Prisoner Re-Entry Program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program, and the Voluntary Income Tax Assistance Program and others.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.6%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 70.9%; rating input score 71; 19th 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; 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: NotApplicable
    • 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: 6.5%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.42; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.6% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $234K · 25 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 37 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 32 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 30 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive 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.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.