Bleeding Disorders Association of South Carolina

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237400632
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2013, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Greenville, SC, USA
Phone
8643509941
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing, Shelter N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$484,313
Expenses
$519,539
Assets
$527,100
Liabilities
$3,089

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Taylor Upton (Vice President)
  • Shelley Crisp (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Suzanne Martin (Director): $81,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To raise awareness for and advocate on behalf of persons with bleeding disorders and their families provide education and supportive services and promote ongoing research to improve the quality of life for those affected.

What it reported doing in 2025

Rural Outreach Support Programming: The Voices of 46 In 2025, BDASC conducted over 60 in-person educational outreach programs across South Carolina, reaching communities in the Upstate, Midlands, and Lowcountry regions. These efforts reduced the need for long-distance travel and ensured that families living in rural and underserved areas had access to critical information and support. Program topics included scholarship and camp opportunities, insurance navigation, healthcare policy updates, school and employment resources, bleeding disorders education, and advocacy training. Through this extensive outreach, we were able to provide educational and networking support to hundreds of families throughout the state. As part of our commitment to awareness, BDASC led efforts during National Bleeding Disorders Awareness Month in March, securing proclamations from state, county, and city officials to recognize and elevate the visibility of bleeding disorders across South Carolina. In addition to these efforts, we launched a statewide initiative to proclaim special days of awareness specifically honoring our Von Willebrand Disease (VWD) and rare bleeding disorder communities, and our women who bleedensuring their unique challenges and needs received the recognition they deserve.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.1%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.3%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.01; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.1% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 11 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 17 filed program accomplishments · $475K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $81K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.