Urban League of Greater Chattanooga

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581436933
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chattanooga, TN, USA
Phone
4237561762
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,314,860
Expenses
$4,701,167
Assets
$4,074,289
Liabilities
$842,256

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CANDY JOHNSON (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CANDY JOHNSON (President & CEO): $191,482 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 enable african-americans and other disadvantaged persons to secure economic self reliance, parity, power and civil rights.

What it reported doing in 2024

The family prosperity initiative encompasses all workforce-related initiatives within the center for education and family empowerment center. Its ultimate goal is to serve families through a holistic approach, fostering social and ecomomic prosperity by equipping them with the knowledge, skills, connections, financial stability and wraparound supports needed for long-term economic and employability success. Key programs include: level up educational academy, annual hiring fairs, senior community service employment program(scsep), workforce training and development workshops and job coaching.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 73% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.7%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $51.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th 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: Limited
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.7% of revenue deployed · 78.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $191K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.