Golden LEAF
Legal name: The Golden Leaf Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 522204473
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jun 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Rocky Mount, NC, United States
- Phone
- 252-442-7474
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $171,537,614
- Expenses
- $169,872,591
- Assets
- $1,527,467,982
- Liabilities
- $199,859,409
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SCOTT T HAMILTON (PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- SCOTT T HAMILTON (PRESIDENT/CEO): $346,699 total reported compensation
- EDWARD P LORD (SVP/GENERAL COUNSEL): $261,056 total reported compensation
- ERICA L SMITH (VP OF FINANCE): $214,392 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Golden LEAF’s mission is to increase economic opportunity in North Carolina’s rural, tobacco-dependent, and economically distressed communities through leadership in grantmaking, collaboration, innovation, and stewardship as an independent and perpetual foundation. The Golden LEAF team continuously strives to bring positive economic change to the communities of North Carolina. Engaging with applicants and recipients at every stage of the process, we’re always available to offer support and help. Each staff member contributes unique talent, insight, and experience, and together they further the mission of the Golden LEAF Foundation. For questions about Programs, Priority Areas, or Application processes, please visit our Contact Programs page or fill out our Programs Inquiry Form. Evan Benedict.
What it reported doing in 2024
See schedule o.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 75% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 62
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 96.9%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.99; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $164.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $347K · 24 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.6M reported
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 150 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 131 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.