Greater Peace Community Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
631254397
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Opelika, AL, USA
Phone
3347499487
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,031,844
Expenses
$765,786
Assets
$815,886
Liabilities
$411,385

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Clifford E Jones (President)
  • William Sauser (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Wilbert Payne (Parliamentarian)
  • Kimberly Blanton (HR Committee)
  • Andrew Rembert III (Director)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Greater Peace Community Development Corporation (GPCDC) is a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to strengthening families in East Alabama by providing affordable housing, quality childcare, educational programs, and community support services. The organization operates a licensed child development center, after-school and summer programs, and food assistance initiatives that address hunger and economic hardship. GPCDC also offers scholarships, community outreach, and programs designed to improve financial stability and overall well-being for children and families. Through these services, GPCDC works to promote equity, expand opportunity, and enhance the quality of life in the communities it serves.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Greater Peace Community Development Corporation provides after-school care for students in grades K-6 with a strong emphasis on academic support in math, reading, science, history, Spanish, and art. Retired teachers and school paraprofessionals offer homework assistance, test preparation, and enrichment activities to strengthen students' learning abilities. Staff and volunteers, including Auburn University College of Education students, also provide individualized tutoring for students who need targeted academic support. Traditional and innovative instructional methods are used to ensure students remain engaged and actively learning. GPCDC also operates a six-week Summer Educational Enrichment Program (SEEP) for students in grades K-8. This program offers hands-on, project-based learning in reading, writing, math, history, science, art, physical education, and character education. Certified teachers and experienced staff lead students through meaningful, engaging academic experiences. Students receive a hot, healthy breakfast, lunch, and snack each day and participate in weekly field trips that provide exposure to art, history, and science.

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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.8%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 53.6%; rating input score 54
  • Fundraising efficiency: $84.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 24th 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: 25.8%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.8% of revenue deployed · 53.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $411K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.