Georgia Extension 4-H Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582124461
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Danielsville, GA, USA
Phone
7067952281
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$61,239
Expenses
$60,773
Assets
$57,308
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Travis Tankersley (County Extension Coordinator/Ag Agent)
  • Michaela Brown (4-H Agent)
  • Emily Williams (Family and Consumer Sciences Agent)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization's primary exempt purpose is to organize and administer 4-H, Agriculture and Natural Resources, and Family and Consumer Sciences programs in Madison County, Georgia.

What it reported doing in 2025

4-H Project S.A.F.E. provides safe, educational and competitive opportunities for thirty-three 4-H members to participate in shooting sports events in BB, Archery and Shotgun.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 62% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.8%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.94; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.6% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.