Greater Winston-salem Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
560459820
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Winstonsalem, NC, USA
Phone
3367289200
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,743,231
Expenses
$2,621,262
Assets
$6,313,925
Liabilities
$2,067,932

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK OWENS (PRESIDENT/CE)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK OWENS (PRESIDENT/CE): $358,260 total reported compensation
  • NICK REED (CFO): $190,505 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Greater winston-salem inc. Is a leading business organization in winston- salem and forsyth county. The organization is focused on establishing winston-salem as a technology-driven economic center. Greater winston-salem inc. Offers services to strengthen existing businesses, to encourage small business creation, and to develop a talented workforce within forsyth county.

What it reported doing in 2024

Economic and educational development: to promote and increase local business within the winston-salem/forsyth county area, specifically focusing on developing high-tech opportunities/business base and the necessary community infrastructure through educational and community partnerships designed to ensure the proficiency of the current and future workforce for local manufacturing/service industries and new business initiatives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 30%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.41; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 31 of 31 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $358K · 33 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 18 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.