Ufcs

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
872591184
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Sugar Land, TX, USA
Phone
8328000701
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nursing Services (General)

Reported finances

Revenue
$678,362
Expenses
$532,825
Assets
$532,482
Liabilities
$51,200

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Shaundra Williams (President)
  • Marissa Moreno (Vice President)
  • Yvonne Eype (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Yvonne Eype (Executive Director): $84,677 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Empower all students to lead choice-filled lives and increase the rate of college completion and viable career obtainment for historically underserved students. To better support students in mitigating and balancing school work and life challenges systems must be put into place that both streamlines the college-going process and personalize support structures. United for College Success UFCS works with traditional and public charter school districts community organizations and higher education institutions to implement tailored and systemic changes.

What it reported doing in 2025

Opportunity Youth and Workforce Readiness Programs Thrive Through and Talent Track: UFCS assisted 350 Opportunity Youth with workforce readiness leadership development and career exploration for economic mobility. In 2025 they provided 36 trainings engaged 300 in mentoring supported 200 in career exploration connected 150 to opportunities and facilitated 35 partnerships in healthcare IT skilled trades teaching and certifications for underserved learners.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.8%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 79.9%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $85.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.5%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.9%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 45% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 37.4% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 52.6% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.8% of revenue deployed · 79.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $426K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $85K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.