YMCA of the Sandhills

Legal name: Young Men's Christian Association of the Sandhills North Carolina

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
560582025
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fayetteville, NC, United States
Phone
Fayetteville Branch: 910-426-9622 option 1; Saleeby Family Branch: 910-426-9622
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,025,906
Expenses
$3,388,541
Assets
$4,055,344
Liabilities
$1,750,721

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

People named in this filing

  • STACY BLEDSOE (DIRECTOR)
  • ACE BULLARD (DIRECTOR)
  • JULIA DEAN (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

For 175 years, the Y has been at the heart of community—where strangers become friends and everyone finds a place to belong. It’s where kids feel seen, teens find purpose, parents discover support and older adults connect with others, with programs ranging from swim lessons and afterschool care to enrichment classes and personal training.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization is committed to building the foundations of community. We seek to understand and address community needs in order to effect lasting personal and social change in our three areas of focus: youth development, healthy living, and social resonsibility.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $101 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 89.9% of revenue deployed · 80.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.