Alabama Green Industry Training Center Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 204245448
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2012–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Birmingham, AL, USA
- Phone
- 2055522796
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Professional Societies, Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $46
- Expenses
- $27,248
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN NABORS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- JOHN NABORS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- JAMES HARWELL (CHAIR)
- DAVE BRADFORD (VICE-CHAIR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Help educate professionals, students and homeowners to become better stewards of the environment through training and testing, for purposes of certification and recertification
What it reported doing in 2025
Provided direction via web for education opportunities for green industry individuals for their certifications across Alabama numbering approximately 2,207 contacts from jan 1 - june 30 2026
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 64
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 7
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 3
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -59,134.8%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -16.3% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -23.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 3.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $849 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- 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: Program expense ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.