Alabama Sheriffs Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
852399276
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Montgomery, AL, USA
Phone
3342647827
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$419,527
Expenses
$194,026
Assets
$603,082
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HEATH JACKSON (PRESIDENT)
  • DERRICK CUNNINGHAM (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SHANNON OLIVER (DIRECTOR)
  • DONALD VALENZA (DIRECTOR)
  • BILLY MURRAY (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To give private citizens and businesses the opportunity to support Alabama's sheriffs; to support the sheriffs of Alabama through special projects and programs that are not possible with county funding alone; to promote public safety by providing sheriffs, deputy sheriffs, sheriff employees and certain strategic partners of sheriffs with access to the latest training and technology in their pursuit of justice and protection of all.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Alabama sheriffs foundation supported the Alabama ffa with a donation for their 2025 crime prevention awards, awarded 4 scholarships to children of sheriff office employees, provided sponsorship of chief clerks & admin training, provided funding for renovations of the association building, made donations to the Alabama sheriffs youth ranches, assisted in purchase of handicap chair for sheriff's office employee, donated to victims of crime & leniency (vocal), and donated to taps black hats honor guard.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 88% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.1%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.7%; rating input score 98; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 53.8%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.11; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 61.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 39.6% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 47.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.1% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $171K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 18 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • 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.