Montgomery Area Coalition for the Homeless Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300060631
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Montgomery, AL, USA
Phone
3342616182
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$709,424
Expenses
$668,233
Assets
$165,492
Liabilities
$47,137

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GHANDI DANIELS (PRESIDENT)
  • ACQUANETTA KNIGHT (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • LYDIA PICKETT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LYDIA PICKETT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $67,359 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To evaluate needs, facilitate solutions, and seek resources to end homelessness in the river region.

What it reported doing in 2023

Implement rapid rehousing and homelessness prevention services for persons at risk of homelessness and homeless and to provide associated services such as case management, financial assistance, and enrollment of homeless persons in the homeless management information system. Promote community wide commitment to the goal of ending homelessness by quickly rehousing homeless individuals, families, and communities by homelessness; promote access to and effect utilization of mainstream programs by homeless individuals and families, and optimize sufficiency among individuals and families experiencing homelessness.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 84% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, and 56% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.4%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $315.12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.1%; rating input score 99; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.8%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.1%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.4% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $584K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $67K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.