Athletic Foundation of the University of North Carolina at Charlotte

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237050570
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Phone
7046875432
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,644,735
Expenses
$13,438,117
Assets
$48,431,223
Liabilities
$232,497

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

Leadership & pay

36 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALI R LACY SHERRILL (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BETH CRIGLER (EX-OFFICIO): $404,451 total reported compensation
  • RICHARD AMON (TREASURER): $343,567 total reported compensation
  • KELLY WEATHERMAN (SECRETARY): $145,550 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 is to assist the university of North Carolina at charlotte in its general athletic programs by providing financial aid to student athletes and to provide other such aid to improve athletic facilities and further athletic operations and programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Support to unc charlotte to provide funds for athletic departmental operations, scholarships, other financial aid, and administration of athletic programs including mens and womens basketball, soccer, baseball, softball, volleyball, football and cheerleading.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 81% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.6%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $45.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 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: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 24th 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: 19.3%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.6; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.6% of revenue deployed · 71.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 33 of 36 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $9.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $404K · 36 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.3M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.