Youth Leadership Initiative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861711656
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6126448487
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$423,405
Expenses
$382,287
Assets
$297,191
Liabilities
$22,293

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ntxheb Chang (Co- Executive Director)
  • Lee Vue (Co- Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ntxheb Chang (Co- Executive Director): $75,927 total reported compensation
  • Lee Vue (Co- Executive Director): $39,772 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Youth Leadership Initiative (YLI) is to develop a new generation of leaders who are prepared to build a thriving Twin Cities area and drive positive change in the systems that impact youth.

What it reported doing in 2024

During the 2024-2025 fiscal year, YLI refined its youth programming, strengthened its institutional governance, and developed new partnerships. Key accomplishments include: Expanded Board of Directors; Partnered with Macalester College's student employment program to hire 2 interns and Right Track program to host 4 youth interns; Empowered youth action teams to research and develop 4 community projects and co-author a zine exploring liberation and culture; Developed a new programming component to introduce place-based field trips. YLI After School Leadership Program YLI served 40 youth. This was an increase over the prior year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.8%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 65.1%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $90.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.7%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.3%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.8% of revenue deployed · 65.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $249K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $76K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.