High Point Convention & Visitors Bureau Inc Dba Visit High Point
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 561923880
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- High Point, NC, USA
- Phone
- 3368845255
- Rating
- 50
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,727,131
- Expenses
- $2,866,587
- Assets
- $3,935,080
- Liabilities
- $1,651,141
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MELODY BURNETT (President)
Highest reported compensation
- MELODY BURNETT (President): $144,357 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 mission of Visit High Point is to position High Point as a destination that visitors will enjoy and that locals will want to promote.
What it reported doing in 2024
Visit High Point is the official destination management and marketing organization that positions High Point as a vibrant destination that visitors will enjoy, and locals will want to promote. Our vision is to leverage High Points reputation as the Home Furnishings Capital of the WorldTM and the home of a world-class University to further the evolution of High Point as a unique destination. While the focus is to increase economic impact by providing first-class service to our visitors and meeting planners, Visit High Point also works to develop our city as a year-round destination that is competitive in the marketplace, generating more brand ambassadors and fans. We want each visitor to make yourself at home in High Point, NC. Established by state legislation in 1984, Visit High Point, a non-profit 501 c 6 organization, is funded by a self-imposed three percent room occupancy tax on local hotels. No local taxpayer funds city, county, or state are used to fund Visit High Point. The Regional Visitors Center is located at 1634 N. Main St., Suite 102, High Point, N.C. For more information, visit www.visithighpoint.com.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 94% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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: 88
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 33
- 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: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 96.3%; rating input score 96; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -5.1%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -27% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 13 of 15 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
- 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.