United Way of Greater Cincinnati

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
310537502
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cincinnati, OH, USA
Phone
5137627100
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$45,284,145
Expenses
$50,866,198
Assets
$86,616,220
Liabilities
$23,436,659

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

Leadership & pay

43 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Moira Weir (Chief Executive Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Moira Weir (Chief Executive Officer): $549,348 total reported compensation
  • Michael Baker (Chief Strategy Officer): $206,350 total reported compensation
  • Terrance Bush (Chief Financial Officer - Exit 05/25): $191,755 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

United Way leads and mobilizes the caring power of individuals and organizations to help people measurably improve their lives.

What it reported doing in 2024

Donor Designations See Schedule O Donor Designations Donor Designations As part of the UWGC campaign, donors may designate all or a portion of their pledge to a UWGC initiative or impact area, a UWGC agency partner, or another United Way. Some donors are able to designate to any 501(c)(3) organization, based on their company's giving platform. Organizations receiving donor designated contributions through UWGC undergo screening prior to distribution of funding. Screening includes verification of compliance with the provisions of the Patriot Act and verification of current status as an IRS code section 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Designations received in the fall campaign are distributed the following year based upon amounts collected.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 81% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 98
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.7%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 85.7%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.9%; rating input score 98; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.9%; rating input score 97; 31st 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: -12.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.7; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.4%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.7% of revenue deployed · 85.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 31 of 32 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $43.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $549K · 43 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $701K reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 40 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 232 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 225 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.