Carolina Pregnancy Care Fellowship

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562074962
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
WinstonSalem, NC, USA
Phone
7042818631
Rating
91
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Reproductive Health Care Facilities and Allied Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,297,873
Expenses
$5,356,780
Assets
$1,186,396
Liabilities
$1,149,614

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Bobbie Meyer (State Director): $84,624 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Assist pregnancy care centers. The purpose of the organization is to provide training, consultations, exchanging ideas, and inter-agency networking, and opportunities for social interaction to pregnancy care centers, maternity homes and adoption agencies in North Carolina.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Circle of Care Program Grant from NC Department of Human Health Services. The purpose of the Circle of Care Program is to enable pregnancy centers to expand and Circle of Care Grant continued...strengthen their current services to pregnant women and families by creating a comprehensive wraparound focus of services including case management and financial assistance in areas such as food, housing, and childcare. (1) The first year of the contract was effective July 1, 2024 June 30, 2025) for $2,100,000.00. (2) The second year of the contract was effective July 1, 2025 June 30, 2026 for: $2,100,000.00.The total Circle of Care Grant expenses were $1,576,951.97 in 2025, with 40 participating pregnancy centers in the Circle of Care Grant. Pregnancy Centers received ($1,482,683.70) and administrative costs were ($89,268.27) in 2025.

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 94% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.2%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 98.1%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,752.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.1%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.97; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.3% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.2% of revenue deployed · 98.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $5.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $85K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 69 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 67 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.