Charleston SC Chapter of the Links Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 902101144
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2021–2021
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2021
- Location
- Charleston, SC, USA
- Phone
- 6095191140
- Rating
- 36
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $72,476
- Expenses
- $69,394
- Assets
- $170,467
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Rosemarie D Nance (President)
- Lisa S King (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Rosemarie D Nance (President)
- Lisa S King (Vice President)
- Gail Spencer DeCosta (Recording 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 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Service organization working in our local community across 5 facets, Arts and Culture, Health and Human Services, Services to Youth, National Trends and Services, and International Trends and Services.
What it reported doing in 2021
Other Program Services: granted Beyond Our Walls $1500; The DIVA Foundation $500; Future Leaders $443.92; Charleston Jazz Academy $250; 75 Million Steps Challenge $165.35; Awarded gift cards to youth who completed the Future Leaders Program- 15graduates (NTS); participated in the Poster Arts contest - 3 winners (Arts), participants in the 75 million Step Challenge - 12 monthly winners (HHS) $1,525; Program supplies purchased by us but used by youth in partner programs $493.63. Expenses included Gift Card Honorariums for speakers at the Future Leaders workshops (NTS); Gift Card Honorariums for instructors for the STYLZ program (Arts) $540.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 1
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 1.4%; rating input score 1
- Program expense ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 1
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.3%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.46; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 1.4% of revenue deployed · 1.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 6 filed program accomplishments · $1K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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: Mission deployment rate scored 1/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.