Tri-county Community Action Agency Tri-county Community Action Agency

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
540805926
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
South Boston, VA, USA
Phone
4345757916
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,569,557
Expenses
$4,537,843
Assets
$3,200,280
Liabilities
$353,537

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETRINA CARTER (PRESIDENT &)

People named in this filing

  • HENRY CARWILE (BOD MEMBER)
  • RYLAND CLARK (BOD MEMBER)
  • ANDY HARGROVE (BOD MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Tri-county community action (tccaa) is rooted in the community and is utilized by its citizens as a central repository for resources and services which address the needs of the community. Tccaa has been a staple in the community for fifty-five (55) years. Since its inception, tccaa has successfully administered over 50 million dollars in human services and community economic development projects geared towards low income individuals and families. Our program services are developed to enable low income families and individuals the ability to attain skills, knowledge, support and motivation to become fully self-sufficient. Tri-county community action agency is on a mission to eliminate the violence of poverty through advocacy, empowerment and self-sufficiency. We are a non-profit 501 (c)(3) organization dedicated to making a positive difference in the lives of individuals and families who are experiencing the effects of poverty.

What it reported doing in 2024

Weatherization: assists low-income and elderly homeowners and renters in halifax and charlotte counties by reducing their energy consumption through making homes more energy-efficient and by creating safer homes. The most advanced techologies and testing procedures available in the industry are used to ensure efficiency guidelines are met so that heating and cooling costs are reduced. Homes are insulated, repairs conducted, and inefficient or dangerous heating/cooling units are fixed or new ones installed. Homes that would normally be deferred had deferal repairs conducted and homes weatherized. 32 dwelings were completed for weatherization in 2024-2025 fiscal year, almost tripling the number of homes completed the prior fiscal year. Twenty homes required deferal repairs in addition to weatherization.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 93% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.8%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 83.9%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5,825.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.7%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.8% of revenue deployed · 83.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.