Center for Entrepreneurial Development

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
631145791
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Montgomery, AL, USA
Phone
3348324790
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$298,434
Expenses
$393,261
Assets
$2,643,180
Liabilities
$9,597

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRAD ARMAGOST (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN WYATT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CAROL GUNTER (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • DOUGLAS JONES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • BRAD ARMAGOST (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN WYATT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RANDY GEORGE (SECRETARY/TREASURER)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To operate a small business incubator program to assist and aid in the development of small business in montgomery

What it reported doing in 2014

To operate a small business incubator program to assist and aid in the development of small business in montgomery. The incubator program is also used to help reduce unemployment & increase the number of quality jobs in the montgomery area. There are approximately 60 renters in the program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 78.1%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 95%; rating input score 95; 26th 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: -31.8%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.72; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.9% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 20 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $307K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 22 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 to 2014
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.