Arm in Arm

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475121328
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Charleston, SC, USA
Phone
8432708883
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,475
Expenses
$73,900
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

People named in this filing

  • PAT CRANE (VICE CHAIR)
  • MARY HART BRYAN (DIRECTOR)
  • MARGARET MARY KELLY (SECRETARY)

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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To address the public health crisis of gun violence by educating citizens, building awareness, and supporting nonpartisan legislation.

What it reported doing in 2022

Educating the public: arm-in-arm does original research, data collection, tells the personal stories behind the data, shares event and issue information in order to raise public awareness of sc gun violence issues and remedies. Information sharing is accomplished across a variety of platforms on social and traditional media. Beginning in march 2020, due to the pandemic, arm-in-arm transitioned its live in person communcation events to the zoom platform.expanding the conversation: during 2020 important related issues to gun violence prevention emerged, associated with the pandemic and social justice concerns. Arm-in-arm implemented a program to expand the conversation across all platforms of communication on specics such as: the pandemic impact on mental health and rearm safety; pandemic impact on domestic violence prevention; pandemic impact on family and individual stress and suicide prevention; racial equity and gun policy; racial equity and building partnerships with police and our neighboring communities; racial equity and gun ownership; racial equity and assessing organizational strength.increasing the sharing of information: 2020 has required arm-in-arm to be innovative and exible with its methods of communication. We increased the variety of platforms and media products available for the public to access information on gun violence prevention. Below specic projects will be described. Each of these projects had an impact on our 2020 innovations: creating issue specic videos; starting a you-tube channel; taking live summits and discussions onto zoom; varying the timing to include: lunch and learn, as well as, "cocktail hour" type events to accommodate more people and varied lifestyles.publish the blue ribbon report: arm-in-arm produced the 2020 blue ribbon report entitled: gun violence in sc: keeping our children safe. This digital publication raised awareness of South Carolina specic gun violence issues and remedies. It provides data and research, as well as, the headlines and stories behind the data. The expanded 2020 report included videos and power point presentations embedded in the publication. The 2020 edition (as was the original 2019 publication) was written in an easy to read format. This year the report had an expanded audience beyond the sc legislature, sc governor and the sc committee on children to included the general public.action alerts: our legislative and communication teams monitor gun violence policy issues daily throughout the year. This sustained eort results in the arm-in-arm action alert system which continues to inform and educate the public on state and federal legislation, as well as , other relevant non-legislative gun violence prevention issues.partners and collaborations in action: arm-in-arm is building collaborations with organizations to increase the impact of gun violence prevention initiatives and policies. These relationships include local police departments; faith congregations; domestic violence prevention groups, safe schools projects, public health committees, mental health and suicide prevention services, gun owner/hunter groups, non-partisan voter registration initiatives. Our collaboration with the college of charleston reinforces arm-in-arm's sustained commitment to listen and learn from students as well as support their leadership on gun violence prevention issues. The South Carolina committee on children once again invited arm-in-arm to present testimony to them on gun violence prevent. This year (2020) they asked us to provide additional, commentary on the impact of the pandemic on gun violence.in home conversations: arm-in-arm has connected with individuals and groups throughout South Carolina to raise awareness of gun violence prevention issues and remedies by utilizing digital technology. Our zoom events enabled people state wide from their homes to customize their event. Individuals have been able to invite their own guests; often at a day and time that is convenient for

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.2%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,249.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.6% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $68K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2015 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.