Charleston Bridge Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
571072137
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Charleston, SC, USA
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Recreational l Clubs

Reported finances

Revenue
$115,791
Expenses
$98,663
Assets
$483,581
Liabilities
$1,500

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Paul Corkish (President)
  • Dana Osburn (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Paul Corkish (President)
  • Malcolm Fages (Treasurer)
  • Emily Ramsay (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization provides classes for a variety of experience levels to learn and improve knowledge of playing duplicate bridge. In conjunction with this education the organization hosts sanctioned duplicate bridge games that allow class members and other area residents the opportunity to practice compete and improve skill levels.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization provided 4 separate classes that spanned 20 weeks of instruction as well as weekly play and learn lessons every Tuesday. The organization operated over 250 days during the year and served 150 members

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 86% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.5%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 92.8%; rating input score 93

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.8%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.9; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.5% of revenue deployed · 92.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $92K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.