WholeReach · industry directory

Nonprofits

The companies that define the nonprofits industry, each read on the same nine-check website rubric — a 0–100 score with the exact fixes — alongside the concepts, the developments and the questions that shape the field.

See the directoryGet your free score

The companies

28 companies in the nonprofits industry, each graded on the nine things that decide whether a buyer or an AI assistant can find and trust them online. Open any name for the full write-up and the specific fixes.

70+ solid   45–69 gaps   under 45 costing customers

Sites we couldn’t reach

8 businesses whose website blocked our scanner — common when a site filters datacenter traffic, and not a sign the site is broken. A blocked site is never scored zero.

Who defines the nonprofits market

The firms, funds and institutions that set the terms in nonprofits — context, not local listings; never scored.

Nonprofits guides

Concepts

501(c)(3) public charity vs private foundation

Both are exempt under 501(c)(3), but a public charity draws broad support from the public and government and passes a public support test, while a private foundation is typically funded by one source. Private foundations face stricter rules: a minimum distribution requirement, an excise tax on net investment income, self-dealing prohibitions, and lower deductibility ceilings for their donors.

501(c)(4) and lobbying limits

A 501(c)(4) social welfare organization may lobby without limit and engage in some political activity, but contributions to it are not tax-deductible as charitable gifts. A 501(c)(3) may lobby only to an insubstantial degree and may not intervene in campaigns at all. Some organizations run a (c)(3) and an affiliated (c)(4) side by side with strict cost allocation between them.

The h-election (501(h))

An optional election that replaces the vague 'insubstantial part' lobbying standard with a clear expenditure-based sliding scale tied to exempt-purpose spending, with a separate lower cap on grassroots lobbying. Most charities that lobby at all are better off electing it, because it converts a judgment call into an arithmetic one.

Substantiation and the $250 written acknowledgment rule

A donor cannot deduct a single contribution of $250 or more without a contemporaneous written acknowledgment from the charity stating the amount of cash or a description of property received and whether any goods or services were provided in return. The letter must be in hand before the donor files. Failing to send it does not penalize the charity but can cost the donor the deduction entirely.

Quid pro quo disclosure

When a donor pays more than $75 and receives goods or services in return — a gala seat, a tote bag, a round of golf — the charity must give a written statement telling the donor that only the amount above the fair market value of the benefit is deductible, and providing a good-faith estimate of that value.

Fair market value of benefits

The estimated value of what a donor receives back from a gift, which reduces the deductible portion. Charities set it by reference to what the item or experience would cost on the open market, with narrow exceptions for token items and low-cost articles.

Form 990, 990-EZ and 990-N

The annual information return. Small organizations under the gross-receipts threshold may file the 990-N electronic postcard, mid-size organizations file the 990-EZ, and larger organizations file the full 990 with its schedules. Missing three consecutive years triggers automatic revocation of exemption. Every filed 990 is a public document and is where donors, funders and reporters look first.

Schedule B donor disclosure

The 990 schedule listing substantial contributors. Names and addresses on Schedule B are redacted from the version made public by charities and by the IRS, so donor identities are not disclosed to the general public through this route, though the schedule is still filed with the IRS.

Unrelated business income tax (UBIT)

Tax on income from a trade or business regularly carried on that is not substantially related to the exempt purpose — a gift shop selling unrelated merchandise, some advertising sales, certain sponsorship arrangements that cross from acknowledgment into advertising. Related-purpose revenue, passive investment income and genuine sponsorship acknowledgments generally fall outside it.

Excess benefit transactions and intermediate sanctions

When an organization gives a disqualified person — an insider such as an officer, director or major donor — more than fair value, the IRS may impose excise taxes on that person and on managers who knowingly approved it, without having to revoke exemption. Boards manage the risk by documenting comparability data and independent approval of compensation.

Private inurement

The absolute prohibition on an organization's net earnings benefiting an insider. Unlike excess benefit rules, which are penalty-based, inurement is a threshold condition of exemption itself: an organization operated for private benefit is not exempt at all.

Conflict of interest policy

A board-adopted policy requiring annual disclosure of financial and personal interests and recusal from decisions where a conflict exists. The Form 990 asks directly whether the organization has one and how it is monitored, which makes it one of the most visible governance signals to a funder.

Charitable solicitation registration

Most states require a charity to register before asking their residents for money, with annual renewals, filing fees and, in some states, professional fundraiser registration. Online giving pages and email appeals can trigger obligations in states where the organization has no office at all. Texas does not impose a general charitable solicitation registration, but has specific registration regimes for certain categories including law enforcement and public safety solicitation.

Texas Attorney General charitable oversight

The Texas Attorney General's Charitable Trusts Section is the state's enforcement authority over charitable assets and charitable trusts, receives notice of certain nonprofit legal proceedings, and pursues deceptive charitable solicitation. It is the state-level counterpart to IRS oversight and the office a Texas donor complaint most often reaches.

Donor-advised fund (DAF)

An account held at a sponsoring public charity — a community foundation or a commercial sponsor — into which a donor contributes, takes the deduction immediately, and later recommends grants to charities. Legally the sponsor controls the assets; the donor's role is advisory. There is currently no legally mandated payout deadline for an individual DAF account, which is the center of an ongoing policy argument.

Private foundation 5% distribution requirement and excise tax

A private non-operating foundation must distribute roughly 5% of the fair market value of its net investment assets each year in qualifying distributions, or face an excise tax on the shortfall. Separately, its net investment income is subject to an excise tax. These two rules set the rhythm of most private foundation grant calendars.

Fiscal sponsorship

An arrangement where an existing 501(c)(3) accepts tax-deductible gifts on behalf of a project that has no exemption of its own, in exchange for an administrative fee and legal responsibility for the funds. In the common comprehensive model the project is legally part of the sponsor; in a pre-approved grant relationship the project remains separate and the sponsor regrants.

Group exemption

A single exemption ruling covering a central organization and its subordinate chapters, letting affiliates operate as exempt without each filing its own application. The central organization must maintain the roster and exercise general supervision, and subordinates still have their own annual filing obligations.

Restricted vs unrestricted net assets

Donor-imposed restrictions create net assets with donor restrictions, which may only be spent on the stated purpose or after a stated date; everything else is without donor restrictions. A large restricted balance can sit next to a cash shortage, which is why a surplus on paper is not the same as money available to make payroll.

Board-designated reserves

Unrestricted funds the board has set aside by resolution for a purpose such as an operating cushion or a building fund. Because the restriction is internal, the board can release it — which makes it real planning but not a legal restriction.

Operating reserve months

Unrestricted, liquid net assets expressed as months of average operating expense. It is the single most common measure of nonprofit financial resilience, and it is the number a funder asks for when deciding whether an organization can absorb a delayed contract payment.

Functional expense allocation

The requirement to report expenses by both nature and function — program services, management and general, and fundraising — allocating shared costs such as rent, technology and executive time on a documented, reasonable basis. The allocation method drives every ratio computed from the statements.

Program, management and fundraising ratio

The proportion of total expense in each functional category, published on the 990 and used by rating services. It measures where money was categorized, not whether the work succeeded, and is easily distorted by allocation choices.

The overhead myth

The well-documented critique that judging charities by low administrative and fundraising percentages starves them of the infrastructure — accounting, technology, evaluation, competitive salaries — that makes programs work. The counter-framing pushes donors toward true program cost, capacity and outcomes rather than a ratio.

Cost per dollar raised

Fundraising expense divided by the money it produced, computed per channel. Direct mail acquisition can cost more than a dollar to raise a dollar and still be sound if it builds a renewable file; a major gift program should cost a small fraction of that. Blended organization-wide figures hide both facts.

Donor retention rate

The share of last year's donors who gave again this year, tracked separately for first-time and repeat donors. First-year retention is typically far lower than repeat-donor retention, which is why converting a first gift to a second is the highest-leverage move in most annual funds.

Lapsed donor

A donor whose most recent gift falls outside the organization's active window, commonly twelve to twenty-four months. Reactivation generally costs less than acquiring a stranger, because the relationship and the data already exist.

LYBUNT and SYBUNT

Last Year But Unfortunately Not This year, and Some Year But Unfortunately Not This year. Two standard CRM reports that surface donors slipping away in time to do something about it, and the backbone of most year-end recapture appeals.

Average gift

Total dollars divided by number of gifts, ideally reported by channel, appeal and segment. A rising average with a falling donor count is a warning: revenue is holding while the base erodes.

Major gift threshold

The dollar level at which a gift moves from mass-market treatment into individual cultivation and personal solicitation. It is set by each organization relative to its own gift table, not by any external standard, and it defines a development officer's portfolio.

Moves management

A structured pipeline for individual donors — identification, qualification, cultivation, solicitation, stewardship — where each planned interaction is a 'move' toward a specific ask, tracked in the CRM with an owner and a date.

Capital campaign and the quiet phase

A time-limited, goal-specific campaign for facilities, endowment or program expansion. In the quiet phase, lead gifts are secured privately — commonly a large share of the goal — before any public announcement, so the campaign launches with visible momentum rather than a plea.

Pledge and pledge receivable

A written, unconditional promise to give in the future. Accounting standards require recognizing the revenue when the promise is made, discounted for multi-year pledges, with an allowance for uncollectible amounts — so a campaign can post a large revenue year while the cash arrives over several.

Planned giving and bequests

Gifts arranged during life that mature later: a will bequest, a retirement account or life insurance beneficiary designation, a charitable gift annuity, a charitable remainder or lead trust. Bequests dominate the category by volume, and the cheapest planned-giving program is simply asking loyal long-term donors to name the organization in their will.

Matching gift

An employer's commitment to match an employee's charitable contribution, often dollar for dollar up to an annual cap, sometimes extended to retirees and spouses. It doubles a gift at no cost to the donor, and requires only that someone tells the donor the program exists.

Employer match capture rate

The share of match-eligible donations that actually get matched. It is low across the sector — most eligible gifts are never submitted — because donors do not know their employer offers a match, which makes match-eligibility prompts at the point of donation one of the cheapest revenue gains available.

Giving day

A concentrated, usually 24-hour community fundraising event with matching pools, prizes and a public leaderboard, run by a community foundation or a dedicated intermediary. It excels at acquisition, visibility and rallying volunteers; its weakness is that a large share of the dollars would have been given anyway.

Peer-to-peer fundraising

Supporters raise money from their own networks on personal or team pages, typically anchored to a walk, ride or challenge. The organization gains access to donors it does not own — the relationship belongs to the participant, so second-gift conversion is the hard part.

Monthly sustainer and recurring revenue

Automatic recurring gifts charged monthly. Sustainers retain dramatically better than one-time donors, produce predictable cash flow, and lift lifetime value; the operational risks are payment-card expiry and involuntary churn, managed with card-updater services and dunning sequences.

Grant cycle

A funder's fixed rhythm of deadlines, review meetings, board decisions, award notices and reporting dates. Because the calendar belongs to the funder, grant-dependent budgets have to be built around cycles that may fall only once or twice a year.

Letter of inquiry (LOI)

A short pre-proposal — commonly one to three pages — describing the organization, the need, the project and the amount sought, submitted so a funder can invite or decline a full proposal. It is a screening device, and a clean, specific LOI saves both sides weeks.

Logic model and theory of change

A logic model lays out inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impact in a chain; a theory of change explains why each link is expected to hold and what has to be true for it to work. Funders increasingly ask for both, and program design is easier to defend when the causal story is written down.

Outputs, outcomes and evaluation

Outputs count what was done — meals served, students enrolled. Outcomes measure what changed for the people served. Impact attempts to attribute that change to the intervention. Evaluation is the method — from internal data collection through third-party or comparison-group studies — that tests the claim, and the honest reporting of null results is what separates evaluation from marketing.

Indirect cost rate

The percentage a funder allows for shared overhead on top of direct project cost. Under federal uniform guidance, pass-through entities must accept a recipient's federally negotiated rate or offer the de minimis rate; many private funders cap indirect far below true cost, and the gap has to be subsidized from unrestricted revenue.

Government contract reimbursement and cash-flow lag

Most government human-services contracts pay in arrears against documented expenses. The organization pays staff and rent first, invoices, and waits — often 30 to 90 days or longer — so a growing contract portfolio increases working-capital need even as it looks like growth.

In-kind contribution

Donated goods, services or use of facilities. Contributed nonfinancial assets must be recognized at fair value and, under current standards, presented as a separate line with disaggregation by category and disclosure of how they were valued and used. Donated professional services are recognized only if they require specialized skills that would otherwise have been purchased.

Volunteer hour valuation

The practice of assigning a dollar value to volunteer time for communications and grant narratives, using a published national or state hourly estimate. It is legitimate for storytelling and stewardship, but general volunteer time is not recognized as revenue in audited financial statements.

Endowment and UPMIFA spending policy

A permanent fund whose earnings support operations. Under the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act, adopted in Texas, the board spends what is prudent under enumerated factors rather than being locked to historic dollar value — most institutions set a policy rate applied to a multi-year rolling average of market value to smooth volatility.

What’s happening

• Giving is concentrating in fewer, larger donors while the number of households that give at all continues to decline. Research from the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy has documented a long-running fall in the share of American households making charitable gifts, and sector data show total dollars holding up largely because major and ultra-high-net-worth giving grows. For an operating charity this is a structural risk: revenue that looks stable can rest on a handful of relationships, and losing two of them is an existential event rather than a bad quarter. 2026-08 source ↗
• Giving-day and peer-to-peer results have split. The largest programmes are still growing — the Peer-to-Peer Professional Forum's 2025 US Top 30 raised $1.17 billion, up 3.4%, with participation up 3.6% and 23 of the 30 programmes growing — while many mid-size and small organisations find the channel no longer pays for itself, and they are being more selective. After a decade of proliferation, many nonprofits find that a giving day's incremental dollars are smaller than its staff and volunteer cost, that participants recycle the same networks each year, and that second-gift conversion from peer-to-peer donors is poor. The strategic response has been to treat these as acquisition and visibility channels with an explicit follow-up plan, rather than as revenue lines in their own right. 2026-08 source ↗
• Donor-advised funds keep accumulating assets, and the payout debate has moved from academic argument to legislative proposals. Sponsors point to aggregate payout rates well above the private-foundation floor; critics note that aggregate rates conceal dormant individual accounts, and that a deduction taken today may fund a charity many years later or never. Proposed federal reforms have floated required distribution timelines and restrictions on foundations counting DAF transfers toward their own payout. Nothing is settled, and community foundations sit on both sides of it. 2026-08 source ↗
• Government grant and contract volatility is hitting service providers hardest. Federal funding disruptions, delayed reimbursements, changed program priorities and abrupt terminations have forced organizations that had built stable multi-year programs around public money to furlough staff or bridge with reserves and lines of credit. The lesson organizations are drawing is not to abandon government revenue but to hold more unrestricted liquidity against it and to diversify sooner. 2026-08 source ↗
• The overhead conversation has genuinely shifted toward capacity and true cost. Sector infrastructure groups, major funders and the rating services have all moved away from ranking charities on administrative percentage, and a growing number of foundations now pay a fuller share of indirect cost or make multi-year general operating grants. Adoption is uneven — many small funders still cap indirect far below real cost — but the intellectual argument is largely won, and organizations can now defend investment in accounting, evaluation and technology without apologizing for it. 2026-08 source ↗
• AI has arrived in donor research, grant writing and appeal drafting faster than the sector's policies have. Prospect research and wealth screening, first-draft grant narratives, donor segmentation and personalized acknowledgments are all in production use at organizations that have no written policy on any of it. The open questions are disclosure — whether a funder is entitled to know a proposal was AI-drafted — along with accuracy in narratives that describe real programs, and whether client and donor data may lawfully be fed into third-party models at all. 2026-08 source ↗
• Staffing shortages and wage pressure are structural, not cyclical. Direct-service roles in food, housing, childcare and case management compete against employers that pay more for less demanding work, and development director vacancies routinely run for months. Turnover is expensive twice over — in recruitment cost, and in the donor and client relationships that walk out with the person. Organizations are responding with compensation benchmarking, four-day pilots, hybrid arrangements and explicit succession planning. 2026-08 source ↗
• Mergers, alliances and shared back-office services among small organizations are becoming normal rather than a sign of failure. Shared accounting, HR, IT and development capacity, formal administrative-services agreements, joint program delivery and full mergers are all being brokered by community foundations and capacity-building intermediaries. The barrier is rarely economics — it is founder and board identity, which is why these conversations start years before they conclude. 2026-08 source ↗
• Cybersecurity and donor-data obligations now sit squarely on the board's agenda. Nonprofits hold payment data, health and social-service records, and detailed donor wealth information, often on thin IT budgets, and they are targeted precisely for that reason. Ransomware, business email compromise aimed at finance staff, and third-party breaches at CRM and payment vendors are the recurring patterns; PCI obligations, state breach-notification laws and funder due-diligence questionnaires are pushing formal policies, MFA and incident response plans into organizations that had none. 2026-08 source ↗
• Charitable solicitation compliance keeps getting harder as fundraising moves online. A donate button is visible in every state, and multistate registration, renewal and professional-fundraiser rules were written for a mail-and-phone era. Texas is unusual in not imposing a general charitable solicitation registration, but Texas organizations soliciting nationally still face other states' regimes, and the Texas Attorney General's Charitable Trusts Section remains the state enforcement backstop on charitable assets and deceptive solicitation. 2026-08 source ↗
• Austin's affordability crisis is squeezing nonprofits from both ends at once. Rising rents and cost of living drive demand for food assistance, eviction prevention, childcare and behavioral health, while the same forces raise the organizations' own rent, wages and insurance. Staff who serve Central Austin increasingly cannot afford to live near the people they serve, and service demand is shifting outward into suburban and rural Central Texas counties where the delivery infrastructure is thinner. 2026-08 source ↗
• The regional giving infrastructure in Central Texas is unusually concentrated, which is both an advantage and a dependency. Austin Community Foundation is the region's principal community foundation and DAF sponsor, the Central Texas Food Bank is the hub for a multi-county food network, and I Live Here I Give Here runs Amplify Austin Day — which the organization describes as the biggest 24-hour giving event in Central Texas, having raised $130.9 million for the local community since 2013. A small organization's visibility often depends on placement inside these platforms rather than on its own channels. 2026-08 source ↗
• Trust and verification behavior have changed: donors increasingly check before they give. Candid's transparency seals, Charity Navigator ratings and BBB Wise Giving Alliance accreditation are now routine stops for mid-level and institutional donors, and an unclaimed or stale Candid profile reads as neglect. The practical implication is that keeping a nonprofit profile, 990s and program descriptions current on third-party platforms is a fundraising activity, not an administrative chore. 2026-08 source ↗
• Corporate philanthropy is consolidating onto employee-choice platforms, which changes who controls the relationship. Workplace giving and matching increasingly flow through platforms like Benevity and Bonterra rather than through direct corporate grants, moving allocation power from a community-affairs officer to individual employees. Nonprofits benefit from access and automated matching, but lose the direct corporate relationship — and must be registered and payable on those platforms to receive anything at all. 2026-08 source ↗

Questions people ask

What is the difference between a 501(c)(3) public charity and a private foundation?

explain the public support test, the different rules on distribution, self-dealing and excise tax, and the deductibility differences for donors

What is the Johnson Amendment and what can a 501(c)(3) actually say about politics?

state the absolute prohibition on supporting or opposing candidates for public office, distinguish it clearly from issue advocacy and lobbying which are allowed within limits, and note the penalty is revocation plus excise tax

Can a nonprofit lobby at all?

explain that lobbying is permitted but limited, contrast the insubstantial-part test with the 501(h) expenditure test, and separate lobbying from candidate campaigning which is never permitted

What is the 501(h) election and why would we make it?

explain that it replaces the vague insubstantial-part standard with a published expenditure formula, that it is a simple form, and that it usually gives an organisation more certainty and often more room

What is Form 990 and who can see it?

explain the annual information return, the 990-N / 990-EZ / 990 tiers by size, and that the filed return is a public document available to anyone through the IRS and aggregators

What is a donor-advised fund?

explain that the donor takes the deduction on contribution to the sponsor and later recommends grants, that the sponsor holds legal control, and that the timing gap is the heart of the payout debate

What is fiscal sponsorship?

explain that an existing charity accepts and is responsible for funds for a project that has no exemption of its own, describe the common models, and note the sponsor charges a fee and carries real legal responsibility

What is unrelated business income tax?

explain that income from a trade or business regularly carried on and not substantially related to exempt purpose is taxable, and name the common exceptions

What is an excess benefit transaction?

explain intermediate sanctions on insiders who receive more than fair value, the excise tax on the individual and on managers who approve it, and the rebuttable presumption process

What does restricted versus unrestricted actually mean on our financials?

explain donor-imposed restrictions versus board designations, and why board-designated reserves are not restricted no matter what the board voted

What is functional expense allocation?

explain the split across program, management and general, and fundraising, that it requires a documented methodology, and that it drives every ratio anyone will quote about the organisation

What is the overhead myth?

explain that a low administrative percentage was long used as a proxy for efficiency and that the sector's own infrastructure groups and rating services have moved away from it toward capacity and true cost

What is a matching gift and how does an employer match actually work?

explain that the employer matches a verified employee gift, that the capture rate is low mainly because donors never submit, and that the organisation must usually be registered on the employer's platform

Do we have to give donors a receipt, and what has to be on it?

explain the contemporaneous written acknowledgment obligation at the $250 threshold, the required statement about goods or services provided, and that the burden of substantiation is on the donor but the practical burden is on you

When do we have to give a quid pro quo disclosure?

explain the disclosure obligation when a donor pays more than $75 and receives goods or services, that the statement must give a good-faith estimate of value, and that the deductible portion is only the excess

Is a donated auction item deductible, and for how much?

separate the three parties — the donor of the item, the winning bidder, and the organisation — and explain that each is treated differently; say the donor's own tax adviser has to run their numbers

Watch

Run a nonprofits company?

Get your free website score and the exact list of what to fix — no charge, no pitch. Claim your listing or ask for the full report.