NC Rural Center

Legal name: Rural Economic Development Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561552375
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Raleigh, NC, US
Phone
919.250.4314
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Societal Benefit

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$69,981,334
Expenses
$11,635,108
Assets
$309,058,828
Liabilities
$93,274,636

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PATRICK WOODIE (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • PATRICK WOODIE (PRESIDENT & CEO): $435,546 total reported compensation
  • CAROLYN RHODES (COO): $340,237 total reported compensation
  • FRANKLIN T ROBERTS (CFO/ASST TREASURER): $275,309 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 NC Rural Center works to develop, equip, and connect rural leaders, and to invest in rural communities through capital, advocacy, and engagement.

What it reported doing in 2024

Leadership & engagement: the center's flagship leadership program, the rural economic development institute (redi) offers participants collaborative leadership skills and rural development strategies to help them return home and make a meaningful impact in their communities. Upon graduating from redi, graduates of the program become part of a larger alumni network of leaders. Redi and homegrown leaders regional leadership training have trained over 1,800 rural leaders. The rural summit brings together community leaders, policymakers, and rural advocates from across the state and nation to engage in a thoughtful, intentional dialogue about the actions we can take today to advance policy and systems change across a broad spectrum of rural development issues. Finally, through our connect church and community connect programs, we locate the powerful intersection between rural church assets and community opportunities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 70% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.

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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.7%; rating input score 24
  • Program expense ratio: 77.4%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $576.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 40th 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; 77th 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: 83.4%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.56; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.3%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 23.7% of revenue deployed · 77.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $436K · 33 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.4M 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: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 37 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 29 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 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.