United Way of Greater Richmond & Petersburg

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237375346
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Richmond, VA, USA
Phone
8047715820
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,136,009
Expenses
$7,233,842
Assets
$14,613,028
Liabilities
$5,962,214

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BARBARA COUTO SIPE (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • BARBARA COUTO SIPE (PRESIDENT & CEO): $215,460 total reported compensation
  • ANGELA OTTO (VP OF PROGRAMS & ADMIN): $157,412 total reported compensation
  • KATINA F WILLIAMS (VP OF COM IMPACT): $148,063 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 of greater richmond & petersburg is a nonprofit organization that exists to mobilize the caring power of our local communities to help those in need and to create opportunities for all people to thrive.

What it reported doing in 2024

Thanks to the generous support of donors, corporate partners and volunteers, in fy25 we were able to support and impact 111,022 households through grants, signature programs and strategic initiatives. Through our three focus areas, healthy community, youth opportunity and financial security - we achieved the following outcomes: youth opportunity: we helped 3,907 young children enroll in high-quality early learning programs and supported 30,996 k12 youth through school and community programs. We also supported the facilitation of adoptive placements for 54 young people.community engagement: we mobilized 1,470 volunteers and advocates to strengthen community programs and expand our collective impact.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, 58% for grants, and 1% for affiliated organizations.
  • 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: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.4%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 71.5%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 65.2%; rating input score 65; 18th 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: 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: -1.4%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.02; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.4% of revenue deployed · 71.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $215K · 24 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 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: 59 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 53 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 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.