The Whistle Stop
Legal name: Whistle Stop Supervised Child Visitation and Exchange Center Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 020693757
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2023
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023
- Location
- Lake Charles, LA, US
- Phone
- 337-562-5344
- Rating
- 49
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Children's, Youth Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $272,097
- Expenses
- $312,536
- Assets
- $258,661
- Liabilities
- $385,065
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Dorothy McDaniel (President)
- Steve LeBlanc (Vice President)
- Nancy Valee (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Nancy Valee (Executive Director): $63,074 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Whistle Stop is a non-profit organization that cares for the needs of children whose caregivers are involved in custody litigation or foster care services by providing a safe environment for supervised visitation and exchanges.
What it reported doing in 2023
The Whistle Stop provides a safe and secure location for children to visit with parents and other relatives they might not otherwise be able to visit due to custody litigation or other difficult family transitions. The Whistle Stop also provides a neutual location where parents can pick up and drop off children without having to interact directly with each other. Our goal in providing these servies is to eliminate as much of the emotional hardwhip that children frequestly have to endure when parents or relatives are in conflict and meet for visitaion exchange.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 16
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 63
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 18.8%; rating input score 19
- Program expense ratio: 16.4%; rating input score 16
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -14.9%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.49; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 20.2%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 18.8% of revenue deployed · 16.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $51K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 to 2023
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 19/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 16/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.