Charles Towne Landing Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570632174
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Charleston, SC, USA
Phone
8436077300
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,775
Expenses
$19,546
Assets
$28,838

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAIGE STOWELL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • PAIGE STOWELL (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID BAKER (PARK RANGER)
  • CAROLINE THIBAULT (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Assists charles towne landing (a state park) in promoting a living history educational program. The charity provides funds for projects not provided for in the annual state budget. Including lawn maintenance, landscaping, volunteer services, educational equipment, overall awareness and engagement, animal forest needs, park apparatuses such as benches, bird baths, picnic tables, and repairs to the site.

What it reported doing in 2024

A race to encourage awareness of charles towne landing and its history by encouraging people to enter the park.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 76% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.8%; rating input score 95

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -188.5%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.48; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.1% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -17.3% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $19K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.