The Elizabeth City State Univ Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237115345
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Elizabeth City, NC, USA
Phone
2523353225
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,154,495
Expenses
$2,358,465
Assets
$22,540,024
Liabilities
$18,290,459

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN WADE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/NON-VOTING MEMBER)

Highest reported compensation

  • KEVIN WADE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/NON-VOTING MEMBER): $249,569 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Governed by a 20 member board, the foundation's purpose is to aid, support and promote teaching, research and services in the various educational, scientific, scholarly, professional, artistic and creative endeavors of the university. The ecsu foundation is committed to enduring the future of the university by building ecsu's endowment to provide for its need in perpetuity. The investment and annual reinvestment, allowed at a higher rate of return than other reserve funds, of the ecsu foundation endowment allows the university to increase its impact on the region as well as the capacity to meet the needs of the students it serves.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided housing for students of elizabeth city state university through vikings village apartments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 68% for direct work, and 32% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.1%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 76.5%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 24th 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: 25.2%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.56; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.81; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.8%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.1% of revenue deployed · 76.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $250K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.