United Way of the Virginia Peninsula

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
540535602
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Yorktown, VA, USA
Phone
7572292222
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,945,405
Expenses
$4,830,121
Assets
$7,970,651
Liabilities
$1,169,328

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Charvalla West (COO): $174,238 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the United Way of the Virginia Peninsula is to improve the quality of life for people in our community by funding programs in the areas of Education, Health, and Self-Sufficiency.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ensuring the Health of our CommunityA community is only as healthy as the people who call it home. We expand access to quality, affordable care, give parents the tools they need to raise healthy children, and get everyone moving more and eating better to approximately 301,395 residents on the Virginia Peninsula. United Way supports free clinics, Senior Services linking our elderly population with social, medical, transportation and community services. Case management assistance for low income seniors. Pediatric Hospice for families caring for catastrophically ill children at home.In addition, United way pays donor designated funds for the Peninsula Combined Federal Campaign and the United Way Community Campaign directly to many 501c(3) organizations in the local area and nationwide.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 81% of its reported program spending out as 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. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.9%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th 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: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 18.8%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.65; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.9% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 19 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 48 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 45 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.