Youthforce Nola

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263606930
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-PF 2020
Location
New Orleans, LA, USA
Phone
5043895901
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,186,785
Expenses
$8,024,967
Assets
$9,521,801
Liabilities
$1,494,351

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHERINE SWINBURN (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CATHERINE SWINBURN (President & CEO): $321,470 total reported compensation
  • MELISSA E EHLINGER (CHIEF OF EA / VP): $206,908 total reported compensation
  • NATHAN STOCKMAN (CHIEF OF EDUCATION): $148,847 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Youthforce nola fuels a movement that equips young people to graduate high school on a path to career success.

What it reported doing in 2024

Youthforce nola brings out the best in everyone in our community-educators and business leaders, civic leaders and technical trainers-so that together we create awareness and real opportunities for our city's youth. Grounded in research, we help young people gain the skills, experiences, and confidence to take charge of their future. So far, nearly 2,000 young people have earned over $3 million through paid internships. Even more powerful, 99% have continued on to college or career-and along the way, they've gained somthing greater: a belief in themselves and a vision of the future they are capable of creating.specific activities in 2024 included; school engagement and capacity: $1,133,250; internship and soft skills: $2,217,972; training provider capacity: $959,298; strategic alignment: $1,221,638 and other direct program service activities: $962,100

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 42
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.5%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $80.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.9%; rating input score 96; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 34.2%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.4%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.5% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $321K · 16 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $770K reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 61 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • 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.