United Way of the Cape Fear Area Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
560529949
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Wilmington, NC, USA
Phone
9107983900
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,694,717
Expenses
$2,948,814
Assets
$2,314,450
Liabilities
$495,684

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tommy Taylor (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Tommy Taylor (CEO): $98,296 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

For every $1 an individual donated last year, $4.78 was invested into local programs and initiatives. The United Way of the Cape Fear Area (UWCFA) mission is to work with our community to leverage resources to improve the lives of local people. The last two years UWCFA leveraged more resources and invested them into the community than any other time in the history of the organization.

What it reported doing in 2024

UWCFA, a local independent, autonomous 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, is affiliated with United Way Worldwide. To maintain this membership, UWCFA adheres to numerous performance standards designed to ensure good volunteer governance, financial accountability and overall transparency. These standards are integrated with UWCFA's business model to assure the use of efficient administrative practices that maximize community impact. Community impact is the means by which donors can invest their charitable gifts in addressing the community's most critical issues and challenges and actually see measurable results of 71 local programs and initiatives that are changing lives. UWCFA provided your community with $2,386,641 in grants and allocations between July 1st 2024 and June 30th 2025. Each year, over 600 volunteer hours are invested in making sure each 3-year investment provides the best social return on the donation for the contributions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.1%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 12.9%; rating input score 13; 12th 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 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.2%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.3%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.1% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $98K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.