Birmingham Zoo Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621231591
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Birmingham, AL, USA
Phone
2058790409
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Zoo, Zoological Society

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,419,714
Expenses
$13,469,126
Assets
$53,177,829
Liabilities
$2,906,153

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Caroline Walker (Jr. Board President)
  • Chris Pfefferkorn (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Chris Pfefferkorn (President & CEO): $314,886 total reported compensation
  • Margaret Whitman (CFO): $173,013 total reported compensation
  • Holllie Colahan (Deputy Director): $150,990 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Birmingham Zoo's purpose is to exhibit animals for the education of visitors, to promote and conduct conservation programs and research studies, and sponsor educational activities for the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Birmingham Zoo's Educational Programs -Students visiting Zoo on field trips was 32,570 and 35 out of 67 Alabama counties and 12 states outside of Alabama served by educational programs. The number of individuals served in ALL programming is below.o Behind the Scenes Tour Participants - 91o Twilight Tour Participants -152o Zoo Snooze Participants -227o Endangered Species Day 1,154o Digital Discovery Program Participants 1,067o Digital Field Experience Program Participants 771o ZooSchool Participants 659o Field Trip Program Participants 1,617o Zoo Events Participants (CCC Day, eRecycling Day) 770o Homeschool Class Participation 749 o Zoo to You Outreach Participants 1,734o Summer Zoo Camp Participants 839o Break Camp Participants 191o Teacher Professional Development Participants 41 o Teacher Night Participants 69

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 90%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.6%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.95; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.7% of revenue deployed · 90% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $12.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $315K · 29 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.7M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.