Alliance for a Healthier South Carolina

What it reported doing in 2025

Membership and ProgramCollective Impact in Action: Over a six-year period, this project funded by The Duke Endowment will identify a statewide strategic direction in addressing health needs and health disparities by: Capturing the voices of those with life experiences through a meaningful collaborative Community Health Needs Assessment process; Aligning and strengthening collaboration between hospitals, community organizations and public health; and Building capacity for data transparency, collective impact, and RBA framework. The Collective Impact in Action (CIA) Initiative strengthens South Carolina's capacity to improve health outcomes by building shared data systems, aligning statewide processes, and equipping partners with tools that support continuous improvement. Through cross-sector collaboration, CIA accelerates the ability of hospitals, community partners, and state agencies to work from the same information, toward the same goals, using the same performance standards.MembershipMembership within the Alliance allows one to join an inclusive network, providing connections with over 60 senior leaders and engaging in dialogue to build stronger relationships. With a strong focus on health equity, the Alliance aligns goals, metrics, and actions across institutions, organizations, and agencies at both the state and community levels. By actively bridging policy and practice, we connect and amplify existing and emerging equity-focused initiativesdriving meaningful, systemic change for a healthier, more equitable South Carolina.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 27.2%; rating input score 27
• Program expense ratio: 76.7%; rating input score 77
• Fundraising efficiency: $45.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th percentile among comparable filings
• Pay-setting controls: Limited
• Foreign activity oversight: Limited
• Grant itemization coverage: 74.6%; rating input score 75; 37th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
  • Whistleblower policy: Pass
  • Document-retention policy: Fail
  • CEO compensation review process: Pass
  • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
  • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
  • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
  • Audit committee oversight: Fail
  • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

• Operating margin: 65.3%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.4; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 22.5%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 106.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 74.1% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 102.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings