Buncombe County Service Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453323540
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Asheville, NC, USA
Phone
8282506536
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Society Benefit N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,674,915
Expenses
$2,619,534
Assets
$1,474,367
Liabilities
$492,226

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • AMANDA STONE (CHAIR)
  • JOHN CREIGHTON (BOARD MEMBER)
  • CURTIS W EULER (SECRETARY)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The buncombe county service foundation's goal is to support and improve access to wellness, recreation, health and community services by building partnerships throughout buncombe county. To help achieve its mission, the foundation board is made up of a mix of county government representatives and community leaders who understand the needs of the county and are working to guide the organization in seeking funding sources and opportunities to enhance county-provided or supported services.

What it reported doing in 2015

Community navigators: created to strengthen a community's capacity to help meet citizen needs, identify, mobilize and leverage unique community assets, empower citizens and communities as change agents to promote positive outcomes, build and enhance collaborative partnerships, reduce over utilization of more costly services. Also used for urgent and emergency needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.7%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 99.7%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.5%; rating input score 95; 29th 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; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.1%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.7% of revenue deployed · 99.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 46 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 43 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.