Georgia United Credit Union Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813414590
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Duluth, GA, USA
Phone
7704766400
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$488,512
Expenses
$743,728
Assets
$189,712
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEBBIE SMITH (PRESIDENT DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DEBBIE SMITH (PRESIDENT DIRECTOR): $1,530,992 total reported compensation
  • LAURA KING (SECRETARY DIRECTOR): $993,849 total reported compensation
  • ROBERT BOGART (ASSISTANT TREASURER): $812,626 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Focused on the lives of families in the communities served by Georgia United Credit Union

What it reported doing in 2024

School crashers is a program that partners with Georgia united credit union to offer Georgia schools a makover which generally includes beautification of outside and inside. It may include playground equipment landscape material benches interior furniture paint and carpeting. Recently we added building sensory rooms for students with social emotional and behavioral needs. The rooms help improve their visual auditory and tactile processing improve gross motor skills and help them self-regulated their behaviors which ultimately improves focus. Schools are nominated for contention and a group of Georgia united credit union employees and members of the foundation team will make the final selections based on the need and the completeness of the application. There is generally one grand prize winner and two runner up prizes. In addition a few individual winners may recieve new carpet or furniture on a smaller scale. In 2022 a total of 5 schools received makeovers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as 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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 57
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.2%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.4%; rating input score 93; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -52.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 89.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31.4% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $715K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.5M · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.