United Way of Greater Greensboro Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
560668555
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Greensboro, NC, USA
Phone
3363786600
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,097,098
Expenses
$7,617,166
Assets
$25,134,209
Liabilities
$3,287,477

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

Leadership & pay

38 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FRANKLIN MCCAIN (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • FRANKLIN MCCAIN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $200,439 total reported compensation
  • NADINE MALPASS (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $159,938 total reported compensation
  • DONNA PRICE (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $137,218 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 improve lives and create thriving communities by mobilizing and uniting the caring power of greensboro, nc.

What it reported doing in 2024

Human service organizations: united way of greater greensboro partners with leading community human service organizations to address the root causes of poverty so that families are equipped to achieve financial independence and stability. We are focused on ensuring that children and youth hit major milestones. We want children ready for school and reading on grade level by age 8 and we want youth ready for success in school, work and life. So, we invest in early care and education, health and development and literacy efforts for children and caregivers. We invest in academic support and college and career readiness for children and youth. In the area of employment and financial stability, we are helping parents get on the path and move over the federal poverty line through employment, educational attainment, safeguarding income and asset building. In the area of health and basic need, we are addressing households' foundational needs to keep them on the path out of poverty by investing in housing to help people stay in adequates, safe and affordable housing or shelter, provide personal safety and gain access to physical and behavioral healthcare, including healthy food. We created and are implementing two integrated service delivery (isd) model programs, one, the family success center (fsc) - a place-based one-stop-shop to access services that help families and individuals have access to services that help people along their journey to financial stability, and two, the guilford success network (gsn). Gsn also implements the isd model approach to serve individuals and households to achieve their goals towards financial stability. The gsn members are guided on their journey to financial stability through the use of an online platform where they can communicate and work with their coordinator to achieve their goals, both in person at a community partner organization or another location mutually convenient (such as the library), or virtually

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 51% for direct work, and 49% for 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.4%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 71.9%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 94.8%; rating input score 95; 29th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.3%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.3; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.4% of revenue deployed · 71.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 33 of 33 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $200K · 38 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $546K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 35 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 30 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.