Community Foundation of Northeast Alabama
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 630308398
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2009
- Location
- Anniston, AL, USA
- Phone
- 2562315160
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $16,101,663
- Expenses
- $14,177,586
- Assets
- $101,766,652
- Liabilities
- $11,604,529
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MATT HOLDBROOKS (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- FRED SMITH (VICE PRESIDENT OF COMMUNITY PARTNERS)
- J MITCHELL ROGERS (FORMER INTERIM PRESIDENT & CEO)
- JENNIFER S MADDOX (FORMER PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JENNIFER S MADDOX (FORMER PRESIDENT & CEO): $201,071 total reported compensation
- DEBORAH PFLEDDERER (CFO): $169,937 total reported compensation
- J MITCHELL ROGERS (FORMER INTERIM PRESIDENT & CEO): $163,100 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To achieve positive change through the generosity of donors, now and for generations to come
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization provided direct support to qualified 501(c)(3) organizations and scholarship support to qualifed educational institutions located primarily in northeast Alabama. The organization also provided direct purchasing in relation to charitable activities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 68% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some related-organization disclosures are missing.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 74
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.7%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 92.7%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: $31.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 16.6%; rating input score 17; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.9%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.18; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 90.7% of revenue deployed · 92.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $201K · 18 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $5.3M reported
- Consistency: 33 of 35 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 76 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 71 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 17/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.