Greater Fort Lauderdale Alliance Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 472362323
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2014
- Location
- Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA
- Phone
- 9546270131
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Economic Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $617,954
- Expenses
- $688,817
- Assets
- $689,620
- Liabilities
- $1,025,270
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MIKE MOORE (VICE PRESIDENT)
- LISA KEELER (SR. VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- ROBERT SWINDELL (DIRECTOR): $419,892 total reported compensation
- LISA KEELER (SR. VICE PRESIDENT): $126,610 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 mission of the foundation is to improve the lives of residents within broward county through a number of initiatives to support a strategic plan for economic development. The foundation is organized exclusively to promote scientific, literary, education and charitable purposes.
What it reported doing in 2024
Labor market workforce skills gap analysis to evaluate the area workforce including analyzing the skills of the workforce and the training needed to improve skills of those needing jobs to meet the needs of employers. Educated 1,800 students on career pathways in target industries in south Florida and introduced them to company leaders who worked with them on soft skills training and informed them of career opportunities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 21
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 70.1%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: -11.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.49; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 23.7%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 79% of revenue deployed · 70.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $483K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $420K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $288K reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.