Hayward Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861888641
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Winston Salem, NC, USA
Phone
3369300140
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,429,484
Expenses
$432,344
Assets
$1,722,932
Liabilities
$21,348

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Julie Bradley (Executive Director)
  • Bill Hayward (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Julie Bradley (Executive Director): $209,413 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See Schedule O

What it reported doing in 2025

Hayward Institute aims to affect change in systems, institutions and individuals around healthy homes. Hayward Institute will 1 raise awareness around the relationship between homes, home habits, and health 2 translate healthy home goals as defined by science into best practices to achieve them 3 illuminate pathways for actionable choices and changes that would result in healthy homes 4 focus on issues of equity for access to information and tools to support healthy homes. Hayward Institute launched programs for school-based education healthcare sector training and education and broadened thought leadership work.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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

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: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 24.9%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 82.4%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 69.8%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.99; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 48.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 37.9% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 49.4% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 24.9% of revenue deployed · 82.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $356K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $209K · 6 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.