Alamance Community & Health Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
462505818
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Greensboro, NC, USA
Phone
3368327000
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$877,684
Expenses
$952,766
Assets
$73,690,874
Liabilities
$5,169,456

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GRAYZER CATHERINE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • GRAYZER CATHERINE (PRESIDENT): $260,645 total reported compensation
  • GREEN MARCY (ASSISTANT SECRETARY): $132,288 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 alamance community and health foundation's (dba, impact alamance) mission is to strategically invest in our community for hope, health and prosperity. To fulfill that mission, we seek to bring the community together for healthy change. We believe that by working together, we can build a stronger, more prosperous future for us all. As a foundation, our goal is to make investments in our community that will create lasting, sustainable change in alamance county. Impact alamance focuses its community investments in three strategic areas designed to create this change: advocating and creating systems for all children to thrive from cradle to career, building healthy environments that make the healthy choice the easy choice and supporting our nonprofits that help create a strong grid of resources for our entire community. Impact alamance is a proud part of the cone health network for exceptional care. As a supporting organization of alamance regional medical center, our investments are r

What it reported doing in 2024

Smarter: develop a cradle to career partnership that engages the community, focuses on eliminating locally defined disparities, develops a culture of continuous improvement and leverages existing assets. Support public education to increase capacity to provide families with wrap-around services they need to succeed. Engage the community in dialogue that builds a culture for supporting and investing in children. Research, identify and invest in best practices for improving early education and wellness for children 0-5.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 59.3%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 40.6%; rating input score 41; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 77.34; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 41.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 59.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $565K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $261K · 15 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 79 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.