United Way of the Big Bend Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
596011150
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tallahassee, FL, USA
Phone
8504140844
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,427,283
Expenses
$3,536,960
Assets
$3,446,458
Liabilities
$1,475,051

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

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BERNEICE COX (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • BERNEICE COX (PRESIDENT/CEO): $154,858 total reported compensation
  • CLAY TULLOS (VP-FINANCE & OPERATIONS): $100,115 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 raise awareness, mobilize resources and find collaborative, targeted solutions for our community's most vital concerns.

What it reported doing in 2024

Funds for the agency's programs come from the contributions of united way of the big bend (uwbb) supporters through the annual fundraising campaign. The community campaign solicits monetary support from the corresponding constituents. Uwbb supported 77 programs across the big bend area last year. The allocation of funds is based on the decision of the community investment review teams comprised of experts in finance, programs related to our impact areas as well as community volunteers knowledgeable about their communities' needs. Panels of volunteers and experts review each agency's finances and programs and operating capacity to deliver proposed services. After thorough analysis of the review data, the community investment team recommends how funds are allocated to each agency's program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 63% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.1%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 69.8%; rating input score 70; 19th 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: -3.2%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.1% of revenue deployed · 85.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $155K · 34 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 28 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 26 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.