Durham Library Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562189129
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Durham, NC, USA
Phone
9195300158
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,607,668
Expenses
$349,803
Assets
$7,969,380
Liabilities
$193,280

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ARTHUR ROGERS (PRESIDENT)
  • LIZ GUSTAFSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KAREN WELLS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • KARA NUNNALLY (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAREN WELLS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $63,617 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mission - the mission of the durham library foundation is to provide a margin of excellence for durham county library. We bridge the gap between county funding and need through investment management and resource development, including annual giving.

What it reported doing in 2024

Adult humanities - the foundation's history began with strong support from the national endowment for humanities and local contributions in 2007. Since then, hundreds of presentations have featured international, national, and local experts of subjects including the arts, music, local history, religion, literature, and culture. Programs are often developed in partnership with our many local arts and humanities organizations, nonprofits, and institutions. One of the largest programs is the annual week-long library fest, which had record-breaking attendance of 2,030 community members and highlighted the state of North Carolina and its people in 2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.1%; rating input score 23
  • Program expense ratio: 64.8%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $42.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: Fail
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 78.2%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 22.78; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.2%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.1% of revenue deployed · 64.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $227K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $64K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.