The Community Foundation of South Alabama
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 630695166
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Mobile, AL, USA
- Phone
- 2514385591
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $13,832,856
- Expenses
- $10,637,098
- Assets
- $119,509,085
- Liabilities
- $2,127,375
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- REBECCA D BYRNE (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- REBECCA D BYRNE (PRESIDENT): $155,000 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 community foundation of south Alabama seeks to build permanent endowments for the long range future of the region it serves and to draw from the strengths of the region's diverse population in designing and funding innovative programs which meet community needs. Serving as responsible stewards of these funds, the foundation makes grants to non-profit organizations in the fields of arts and culture, civic and community, anti-crime and abuse, education, environment, health, human services, and recreation. The foundation's mission statement is as follows: "the community foundation of south Alabama assembles and directs philanthropic assets to make southwest Alabama a better place."
What it reported doing in 2024
The foundation's program service activity consists of awarding grants to various non-profit charitable organizations, based on board of directors' approval and categories as requested by donors. Categories include anti-crime and abuse, arts and culture, civic and community, education, environmental, health, human services, and recreation. A detailed schedule of grants paid can be found in schedule i.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 81% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 90
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 87
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.6%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 90.8%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: $16.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
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: 23.1%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.24; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 96.6% of revenue deployed · 90.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $155K · 22 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 29 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.