The Longleaf Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
753263645
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Andalusia, AL, USA
Phone
3344271029
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,972,811
Expenses
$7,617,005
Assets
$2,706,186
Liabilities
$856,143

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAROL DENHOF (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAROL DENHOF (PRESIDENT): $110,550 total reported compensation
  • AD PLATT (VP OF OPERATION): $94,832 total reported compensation
  • DAVID PADGETT (VP FOR BUSINESS): $89,200 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 the longleaf alliance is the restoration of longleaf pine forests ecosystems across the range, emphasizing its economic and ecological values through research, education and outreach.

What it reported doing in 2024

Us fish and wildlife service partners with tla to provide support, technical expertise and equipment to assist in the forestry recovery effort on tyndall afb. Activities include but not limited to project management and oversight, debris removal, site preparation, purchase and planting of longleaf pine seedlings, and gis database management. Restoration activities will reduce wildfire risk, and improve habitat for threatened, endangered, and candidate species known to occur on tyndall air force base, minimize soil disturbance, and not interfere with the base mission.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 89% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $53.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: 4.5%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.8% of revenue deployed · 86.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $111K · 19 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $968K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.