Junior Achievement of Alabama Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
630340866
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Birmingham, AL, USA
Phone
2052909365
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,581,160
Expenses
$1,117,804
Assets
$19,434,948
Liabilities
$1,140,534

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

Leadership & pay

50 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES REED II (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARLES REED II (PRESIDENT): $213,791 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 junior achievement is to inspire and prepare young people to succeed in a global economy. Through a network of dedicated classroom mentors from the business community, junior achievement works with students and teachers in grades k-12 to implement curricula focusing on seven key content areas: business, economics, entrepreneurship, financial literacy, workplace readiness, citizenship, and ethics.

What it reported doing in 2024

Learning experiences are organized around the three ja pathways: financial literacy, work and careerreadiness, and entrepreneurship. Within each pathway, there are three types of learning experiencesforming a progression of competency-based learning. The first and most basic of the learningexperiences is ja introductory learning experiences (iles) which are used to develop interest for thestudents. Educators select the learning experiences for the students. An educator or volunteer must verify in writing that each ja class was completed in its entirety, with the educator or volunteer, where applicable, completing the required number of class sessions. Verification must be obtained prior to official registration of the class in the ja USA registration system.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 10.6%; rating input score 11
  • Program expense ratio: 83.3%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $110.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 89.4%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.39; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 10.6% of revenue deployed · 83.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 49 of 49 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $931K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $214K · 50 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 11/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.