East Carolina University Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
566093187
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Greenville, NC, USA
Phone
2527374811
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$24,897,775
Expenses
$13,365,939
Assets
$262,540,294
Liabilities
$509,945

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRISTOPHER M DYBA (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PHILIP ROGERS (DIRECTOR): $626,217 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTOPHER M DYBA (PRESIDENT): $443,004 total reported compensation
  • STEPHANIE COLEMAN (TREASURER): $395,705 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 foundation raises, manages, and distributes private resources for the benefit of east carolina university, its students and academic and research programs, through programmatic support and scholarship programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation provides funding for student scholarships and awards. Through its multi-year scholarship programs, named scholarships, and annually funded awards the foundation seeks to assist east carolina university students in achieving their education goals. During 2025, the foundation awarded scholarships to 2,439 recipients totaling $4,941,458 and 79 awards totaling $96,602.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 92
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.3%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th 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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: 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: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.9%; rating input score 88; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 46.3%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.64; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.3% of revenue deployed · 81.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 29 of 33 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $10.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $626K · 33 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $391K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.