Yellowhammer Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 821822204
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2017
- Location
- Birmingham, AL, USA
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Reproductive Rights
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,385,185
- Expenses
- $2,427,097
- Assets
- $4,935,661
- Liabilities
- $205,168
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Telitia J Fountain (Executive Director)
- Elizabeth Ghormley (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Telitia J Fountain (Executive Director): $167,539 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Yellowhammer Fund is a reproductive justice orgqanization dedicated to ensuring all people have the ability to decide when and how to build their families, regardless of race, income, location, age, gender, sexuality, disability, documentation status or number of children.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Yellowhammer Fund is a 501 c3 abortion advocacy and reproductive justice organization serving Alabama, Mississippi, and the deep south. The organizatin envisions a society where reproductive decisions are made without coercion, shame, or sttae interference, allowing individuals and communities to have autonomy in making informed choices about their bodies and future. Committed to community education and empowerment, policy advocacy, and the development of mutual aid systems, the Yellowhammer Fund strives to ensure that individuals never go without the resources they need.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, and 56% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 59
- Transparency & Controls: 69
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 62.9%; rating input score 63
- Program expense ratio: 60.4%; rating input score 60
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 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: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: -1.8%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.03; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 26.8% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 62.9% of revenue deployed · 60.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $168K · 7 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 23 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
- 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.