Alabama Chapter of American Academy of Pediatrics
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 630798492
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Montgomery, AL, USA
- Phone
- 3349542543
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Health
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,035,143
- Expenses
- $1,070,735
- Assets
- $826,462
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JENNIFER MCCAIN MD FAAP (VICE PRESIDENT/PRESIDENT-ELECT)
- NOLA JEAN ERNEST MD PHD FAAP (IMMED. PAST PRESIDENT)
- NORMA MOBLEY MD FAAP (PRESIDENT)
- LINDA LEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- LINDA LEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $112,535 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Obtain optimal health & well-being for all children in Alabama, and to provide educational and practice support for its membership so the highest quality of medical care can be achieved.
What it reported doing in 2024
Developmental screening project - this project provides standardized screening to identify developmental delays in children. The Alabama child health improvement alliance (achia) developmental screening continuous quality improvement training trains practices on routine developmental screening for earlier identification of developmental delays and appropriate referral to best assure a young child's optimal development and readiness for kindergarten. The developmental trainings enable clinics to use the quality improvement plan-dostudy-act method for practice change, with the goals of building capacity to implement standardizeddevelopmental screening in a busy practice, engage families in routine developmental screening using a standardized tool, address parent concerns, and interface with the community to refer at-risk children for diagnostic evaluation and services.
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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 38
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 82.8%; rating input score 83
- Program expense ratio: 79.8%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 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: Pass
- 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: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 82.8% of revenue deployed · 79.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $855K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $113K · 14 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.