Community-campus Partnerships for Health

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943285533
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Raleigh, NC, USA
Phone
9194412082
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,805,693
Expenses
$1,667,888
Assets
$700,497
Liabilities
$38,087

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ALAN RICHMOND (EXECUTIVE DI): $142,497 total reported compensation
  • KENYA CHERRY COOK (FINANCE DIRE): $92,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote health equity and social justice through partnerships between communities and academic institutions.

What it reported doing in 2025

Community engagement: as a leading advocacy and leadership organization in the community-engagement space, the organization is well positioned to engage in national, regional and local programming associated with health equity. The organization is engaged in the following program activities relating to community engagement: administering the robert wood johnson foundation health equity award, North Carolina community engagement alliance (nc ceal), community engagement alliance consultative resource (ceacr), researching covid to enhance recovery (recover) ceacr, all of us research program, and regional emerging special pathogen treatment center (resptc).

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 93% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $463.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 7.6%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.1%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.1% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $142K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.