The Mountain Brook Library Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582094979
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Mountain Brook, AL, USA
Phone
2058790459
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$557,466
Expenses
$314,278
Assets
$10,033,643
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALICIA B LEWIS (PRESIDENT)
  • LAUREN HAYES (FRIENDS PRESIDENT)
  • GARY M LONDON (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LINDSY GARDNER (DIRECTOR): $160,096 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 purpose of the mountain brook library foundation is to support the mission of the o'neal library by delivering financial support for the goals and objectives as stated in the library strategic plan.

What it reported doing in 2024

The objective of the foundation is to define the scope and appropriateness of the grants; to preserve and build the assets of the foundation and protect the purchasing power of donor's gifts; to provide predictability for the foundation's annual grantmaking budget; to set policies with respect to the foundation's spending for grants, goods and services, administrative fees, and any other expenses associated with the management of the foundation and its assets.

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 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.9%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 71.2%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 43.6%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 31.93; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.9% of revenue deployed · 71.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $224K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $160K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.