Big Oak Community Volunteer Fire Dept
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 581921777
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Gadsden, AL, USA
- Phone
- 2568922221
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fire Prevention
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $123,264
- Expenses
- $114,541
- Assets
- $782,976
- Liabilities
- $14,171
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
People named in this filing
- SCOTT MCDILL (CHAIRMAN)
- MIKE CONDIT (VICE CHAIRMAN)
- SAMMY LEE (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 protect, preserve, promote well-being of the health, safety, and property of people residing, working, or otherwise within the big oak community.
What it reported doing in 2025
Fire protection and response
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 93% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 85
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 93.2%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 7.1%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.84; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 93.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $115K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.