Jackson EMC

Legal name: Jackson Electric Membership Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
580301471
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Jefferson, GA, USA
Phone
706-367-5281
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$685,551,827
Expenses
$685,551,827
Assets
$1,478,512,220
Liabilities
$821,915,776

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ROY A STOWE (EXECUTIVE-CO): $1,480,220 total reported compensation
  • ERNEST A CHIP JAKINS III (EXECUTIVE-CE): $1,097,137 total reported compensation
  • JOSEPH L DOROUGH (VP-ENGINEERI): $652,269 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Jackson EMC is a member-owned and member-governed cooperative. By the very makeup of our over 270,000 members, we represent and serve a vibrant and diverse community. As we have for over 86 years, we stand by the cooperative principles.

Jackson Electric Membership Corporation (Jackson EMC) is a member-owned and member-governed electric cooperative serving over 270,000 members across a 10-county service area in Northeast Georgia. For over 86 years, the cooperative has provided reliable electricity while investing in community programs, including youth education and leadership opportunities, and supporting local organizations through its foundation and employee volunteer efforts. Jackson EMC also offers energy efficiency tools and resources to help members reduce their environmental impact.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: 0%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.16; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: Filed program service accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.5M · 16 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $23.9M reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.