Triangle Literacy Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561530150
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Cary, NC, USA
Phone
9197875559
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$471,686
Expenses
$719,868
Assets
$164,083
Liabilities
$164,486

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA ROWE (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA ROWE (PRESIDENT/CEO): $69,024 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The triangle literacy council advances and supports academic, economic, and life success for children, youth, and adults facing barriers to success through multi-faceted literacy education. We believe that a foundation of functional literacy is necessary to survive and thrive in society, and we strive to help build a world in which fulfillment of individual potential leads to personal satisfaction and achievement, sustainable independence, and family and community wellness. We provide literacy programming across a broad spectrum of individuals and families including youth and adults involved with the juvenile justice system, those who are unemployed, students who are behind in school, and non-native english speakers wishing to learn the english language. We offer tutoring, instruction, mentoring, financial literacy, job training opportunities, civic and cultural literacy, academic and social skills development, ged preparation, and workplace literacy.

What it reported doing in 2023

1. For the 2023-2024 year, triangle literacy council's (tlc) adult programs worked with approximately 130 students. Participants were either in our english as a second language (esl), adult basic education (abe), and/or integrated english literacy and civics education (ielce) classes. In our esl classes, non-native speakers have the opportunity to learn the english language through listening, reading, and speaking. In addition to getting the esl component, ielce students learned about the rights and responsibilities of citizenship and civic engagement. Our abe students had the opportunity to strengthen their math and reading skills. Adult programming includes curricula and modules for acquisition and increased proficiency in reading, writing, math, science, conversation, and everyday language communication, along with acquisition of the tools, knowledge, and confidence needed to find and maintain employment. 2. Tlc's youth literacy program worked with approximately 80 students during this same time frame. Students had the opportunity to work with instructors or tutors 1:1 or in a small group setting. They also had the option for virtual or face-to-face sessions. Students were tutored in any area where there was academic concern. All students were assessed in reading and math upon intake and throughout the program to measure academic gains. We use both quantitative data and qualitative data to provide a complete picture of how our program is affecting our participants. Student surveys indicate that participants feel their classroom performance has improved that they felt more confident in their ability to be successful. 3. For the 2023-2024 year, our bull city youthbuild (bcyb) program served approximately 30 students. Students had the opportunity to prepare for and obtain their ged as well as receive workforce readiness training and certifications. During this time, bcyb had a successful relaunch of programming that included recruitment of students and building a base of volunteers and community partners.

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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 84.5%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 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: 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -52.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.23; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 84.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $608K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $69K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.