United Way of Rockbridge, Lexington & Buena Vista

Legal name: United Way of Rockbridge Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
540506318
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lexington, Virginia, United States
Phone
540-463-4482
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$181,001
Expenses
$188,021
Assets
$165,799
Liabilities
$4,147

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROGER CROCKETT (PRESIDENT)
  • LIZ ELIZONDO SCHROEPFER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JENNIFER DENT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNIFER DENT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $38,000 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 Rockbridge (UWR) provides a leadership role in improving the quality of life of the people in the cities, towns, and unincorporated areas of Rockbridge County, Virginia by assessing needs, raising and allocating funds for charitable purposes, and ensuring the appropriate use of those resources.

What it reported doing in 2024

Funds raised are allocated to agencies that submit applications that are reviewed annually by community members functioning as the uwr allocations committee. Uwr also supports special projects and programs. Current partner agencies and programs include: youth and families: campus kitchen school backpack and mobile food pantry, court appointed special advocates for children (casa), rockbridge regional library, rockbridge area ymca, yellow brick road early learning centersafety net: community table, meals for shut-ins, natural bridge/glasgow food pantry, rockbridge area health center, rockbridge area relief association, rockbridge area transportation systemspecial needs: blue ridge autism & achievement center, blue ridge legal services, the coffee house for disabled adults, rockbridge area occupational center, the talking book center, valley program for aging services

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.7%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 81.9%; rating input score 82; 49th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.9%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.2%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 73.7% of revenue deployed · 69.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $130K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $38K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.