Nc Foundation for Soil and Water Conservation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562158494
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Greensboro, NC, USA
Phone
9195104599
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,402,615
Expenses
$1,188,772
Assets
$6,108,536
Liabilities
$3,863,647

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JIMMY GENTRY (PRESIDENT & CHAIR)
  • JAY DARDEN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • AMANDA EGDORF-SAND (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMANDA EGDORF-SAND (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $77,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To build capacity in and provide public relations and financial support to North Carolina's 96 local soil and water conservation districts and their statewide association.

What it reported doing in 2024

Building conservation capacity: the initiative is designed to support conservation capacity at the state level through pilot studies or at the local level through an influx of resources. During the year, districts were provided one-on-one support to develop farmland preservation programs in their county. A total of 86 subawards were created in 2024 for the following: 28 districts for low-cost rental equipment (and demo days) for improving soil health, 7 districts for shared-use, no-cost rental equipment for repairs on hurricane helene-affected farms, 38 districts for environmental education and outreach tools, and 13 districts for drones for agricultural use. Additionally, a program focusing on soil health and freshwater aquatic species support provided technical and financial assistance to districts through internship funding and data collection via an americorps service member.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 82% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 40% for direct work, and 60% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.3%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 89.4%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $238.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 94.6%; rating input score 95; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Fail
    • 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: 15.2%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.14; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.63; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.3% of revenue deployed · 89.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 21 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 48 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 19 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.