White House Association of Alabama

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
630870182
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Montgomery, AL, USA
Phone
3342421861
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
History Museums

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$62,523
Expenses
$71,716
Assets
$873,626
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Susan Patton (First Vice Regent)
  • Evalyn Freiden (Second Vice Regent)
  • Sallie Finney (Regent)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The object of this association shall be to preserve as a Confederate museum and library the home occupied by Jefferson Davis known as the First White House of the Confederacy situated in Montgomery, Alabama.

What it reported doing in 2025

The White House Association of Alabama has one major program service: that is to continue to promote the historical significance of the Jefferson Davis home by utilizing professional photography, enchanced brouchures, media consultants, opening of the house on Saturdays with a historical consultant.

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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.2%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 14th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -14.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.18; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.2% of revenue deployed · 75% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $54K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.