Montgomery Techlab Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
852511814
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Montgomery, AL, USA
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$193,672
Expenses
$386,616
Assets
$503,887
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KEVIN MONDS (DIRECTOR)
  • MARCUS SHAW (EXECUTIVE DI)
  • JABALI WILLIAMS (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

To advance innovation and entrepreneurship in the montgomery region through education, acceleration, and incubation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Through education programs we have supported over 1500 students and young professionals in the region, through hack-a-thons, stem workshops, and entrepreneurship training. Since inception montgomery techlab has accelerated over 25 companies. Our programs have provided participants with coaching, industry mentors from regional organizations, and support in positioning their technology and service solutions against real-life applications. Companies participating in our accelerator programs are provided incubation support in the lab on dexter, a state-of-the-art coworking facility in downtown montgomery.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 80.8%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -99.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.3; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -47.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -100.4% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $313K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.