Alabama Teen Challenge Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237271062
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lincoln, AL, USA
Phone
2057630909
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,464,129
Expenses
$2,645,091
Assets
$1,356,134
Liabilities
$259,780

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EDWARD WILSON (PAST-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ROBERT MEST (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • EDWARD WILSON (PAST-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $93,664 total reported compensation
  • ROBERT MEST (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $13,120 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Teen challenge endeavors to help people become mentally sound, emotionally balanced, socially adjusted, physically well and spiritually alive. Teaching faith in jesus christ alters behavior and instills positive values that allow the entire person to heal. This central spiritual dynamic is the foundation on which all aspects of the teen challenge program are built. Teen challenge rests upon one reason for the success: "the jesus factor."

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization operates community based drug education, prevention and restoration programs. Expenses incurred were to house, board, and rehabilitate the participates in the program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.2%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 83.9%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -7.3%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.2% of revenue deployed · 83.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $94K · 16 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.