Alabama Leaders in Educational Technology

Legal name: Alabama Leaders in Educational Technolog

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820883949
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Montgomery, AL, USA
Phone
3347214115
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$830,332
Expenses
$690,476
Assets
$937,123
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRIS JENKS (PRESIDENT)
  • GREG TITSHAW (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • FABIAN BAUERSCHMIDT (REGION 7 REPRESENTATIVE): $1,290 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promoting the positive impact of technology in education.

What it reported doing in 2025

Multiple professional training conferences and meetings are held throughout the state. These conferences are attended by over 600 ed-tech professionals. Critical information is disseminated, training is conducted, and state and national speakers keep attendees abreast of best practices in regard to technology in education and cybersecurity. Additional year-long professional certification credential programs for technology integration coaches and technology coordinators are conducted. Online professional collaboration via multiple listservs, webinars, website resources, and document libraries are available to assist ed-tech professionals with alerts, problem resolution, and collaboration. Presentations provided to other educational organization and to legislative committees, upon request. Awards for excellence and leadership in educational technology presented.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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 available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.5%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 16.8%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.2%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 71.5% of revenue deployed · 86.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $596K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.