Alliance for Better Nonprofits

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472265490
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Knoxville, TN, USA
Phone
8653132077
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$559,269
Expenses
$718,037
Assets
$576,708
Liabilities
$124,798

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jerry Askew (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jerry Askew (President): $150,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To build a stronger nonprofit community by guiding them toward efficiency and effectiveness through training, consulting, and resources. We serve nonprofits in 25 East Tennessee counties.

What it reported doing in 2020

In 2020, there were 418 Member Organizations including 91 new members. There is an 85 member retention rate. Due to the impact of Covid-19, there were 57 online trainings and 2 online conferences attended by 198 people. In addition, 84 Executive Directors and young nonprofit professionals attended various virtual networking events. The organization also created 18 Covid response workshops, 12 of which were offered free to members. The organization had 56 consulting engagements and was involved in 4 Executive searches. Finally, the orgnaization partnered with United Way of Greater Knoxville on three surveys of 600 nonprofits throughout East Tennessee to assess impact of Covid-19.

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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 14th 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -28.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.9%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $576K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2015 to 2020
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.