The University Heights Center for the Community Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911474131
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2020
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2065274278
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,598,701
Expenses
$2,602,022
Assets
$12,090,656
Liabilities
$454,946

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Angela Mercado (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Angela Mercado (Executive Director): $170,307 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 promote life-long learning, creativity, culture, community activism, and the preservation of our historic building.

What it reported doing in 2025

University Heights Center responds to the community's evolving needs by providing free and below market-rate rentals to long-term nonprofit resident organizations; hosting arts and cultural programs with pay-as-you-can fees; providing a home to early learning programs; and managing programs to serve people who are unhoused. Since 2009, University Heights Center has raised over $10 million in capital improvements funds to preserve the local and federal historic landmark.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 76% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.2%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 83.4%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $35.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 8 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: 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: 43.4%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.65; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.2% of revenue deployed · 83.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $170K · 9 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $2.9M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.