The Economic Development Partnership of Alabama Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
631126742
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Birmingham, AL, USA
Phone
2059434706
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,831,031
Expenses
$3,334,671
Assets
$7,249,620
Liabilities
$882,276

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MILLER GIRVIN (PRESIDENT)
  • STEVE SEWELL (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BAKARI MILLER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LAUREN HYDE (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MILLER GIRVIN (PRESIDENT): $302,296 total reported compensation
  • STEVE SEWELL (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $225,235 total reported compensation
  • LAUREN HYDE (VICE PRESIDENT): $218,535 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Supporting organization for economic development partnership of Alabama, inc.

What it reported doing in 2024

Alabama launchpad is a program of the economic development partnership of Alabama foundation, a 501(c)(3) organization. Through a proof of concept competition, a seed stage competition, regional competitions, imerge networking events and data insights reports, Alabama launchpad provides a framework for individuals in the state to locate innovations, develop their business ideas and connect to a network of experts, investors and service providers that can increase the odds of success. Alabama launchpad provides unique opportunities to obtain start-up capital, receive expert guidance and establish working relationships within the business, academic and investment capital communities. Alabama launchpad also provides networking venues throughout the state to put the spotlight on startup successes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 77.8%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $628.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 99.1%; rating input score 99; 37th 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.8%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.17; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.4% of revenue deployed · 77.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $302K · 12 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $106K reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.