North Georgia Community Foundation
Legal name: North Georgia Community Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 581610318
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
- Location
- Gainesville, Georgia, US
- Phone
- 770-535-7880
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $63,239,090
- Expenses
- $16,602,167
- Assets
- $182,111,364
- Liabilities
- $7,374,251
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHELLE PRATER (PRESIDENT-CE)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHELLE PRATER (PRESIDENT-CE): $288,226 total reported compensation
- LISA WARWICK (SENIOR VP FI): $180,188 total reported compensation
- MEGAN EVANS (VP COMMUNICA): $142,503 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To enhance the spirit of community and quality of life in our region.
What it reported doing in 2025
Service to nonprofits the north Georgia community foundation is committed to supporting local nonprofit organizations. The foundation offers affordable office space to a wide variety of nonprofits. The north Georgia community foundation nonprofit center is home to 14 local nonprofit organizations. Through the ngcf g.r.o.w. Program, ngcf provides professional development and educational opportunities to all nonprofits in north Georgia. This allows nonprofits to strengthen their operations and better achieve their missions.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 85% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 84
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 34.2%; rating input score 34
- Program expense ratio: 95.5%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: $175.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 94.5%; rating input score 95; 33rd 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; 65th 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: 73.7%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.97; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 34.2% of revenue deployed · 95.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $15.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $288K · 28 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 249 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 245 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.