Altamont Park Conservancy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
933647070
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Birmingham, AL, USA
Phone
2054780081
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Beautification and Aesthetics

Reported finances

Revenue
$419,768
Expenses
$66,771
Assets
$361,148
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • LIA RUSHTON (CO FOUNDER)
  • CECIL CLARK (CO FOUNDER)

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

Preserve the natural beauty , ecololgical integrity. Diversity of wildlife, and historical structure of the unique urban greenspace through awareness, education, and advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2025

Create website for public access to current activities and programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 - 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: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 16%; rating input score 16
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: 84.1%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.41; rating input score 81; 81st 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: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 16% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $67K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 16/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.