UNCF — A Mind Is a Terrible Thing to Waste®

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
131624241
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
800.331.2244
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$158,921,384
Expenses
$183,511,929
Assets
$892,426,921
Liabilities
$56,637,648

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

Leadership & pay

48 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR MICHAEL L LOMAX (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR MICHAEL L LOMAX (PRESIDENT & CEO): $1,423,381 total reported compensation
  • MR MAURICE JENKINS (EVP & CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $821,341 total reported compensation
  • MR EARLY REESE (COO): $714,224 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To change the world, one college degree at a time.

What it reported doing in 2024

Direct program expenditures related to disbursements of scholarships and costs for evaluating eligibility for scholarships and expenses associated with providing technical assistance to member schools and other institutions.the work of uncf's growing portfolio of scholarship programs is unrivaled and includes a variety of scholarship programs managed by uncf, such as the fund ii foundation uncf stem scholars program, uncf/koch scholars program, k-12 education fellowship and the frederick douglass bicentennial scholarship program. The panda cares scholars program has expanded to a three-year renewable scholarship award, and the fund ii stem scholars program completed its third (see schedule o)cohort, continuing to build on an impressive record of student outcomes. The walton fellows program, an educational reform program aimed at helping inform new educators on how to improve the k-12 education system from the inside out, celebrated its 10th year. Together, these uncf scholarship and student professional development (internship) programs as well as dozens of other scholarships, internships, fellowships and faculty development opportunities add up to some of the newest, best, and strongest offerings uncf has for students and educators, with much more to come. Helping young people, especially african american and other minority students, get an education that starts on the first day of preschool and doesn't end until college graduation is what uncf is all about. A three-pillar strategy guides our mission: positioning member institutions as a viable college option for students and investing in institutional capacity to improve student outcomes; creating transformational support programs to ensure students are enrolling and persisting through college completion; building awareness of educational attainment and cultivating college-going behaviors within the african american community. The ongoing rapid rise in the cost of college attendance, the inability to earn funds during the covid-19 pandemic and decreasing financial aid have caused more and more students to apply to uncf for assistance each year. However, we can support only one out of every 10 students who applies. These students are our future health professionals, social workers, teachers, government policy makers, entrepreneurs, business leaders and military men and women - they are the future prosperity of our nation. We thank all donors, past and current for their financial contributions and volunteerism and hope new donors are inspired to support uncf's worthy mission by giving as deeply as possible because "a mind is a terrible thing to waste, but a wonderful thing to invest in."

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.5%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: 88.3%; rating input score 88; 21st 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: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -15.5%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.86; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 94.5% of revenue deployed · 78.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 31 of 31 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $144.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.4M · 48 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $8.2M reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 42 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 94 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 40 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.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.