College of Charleston Alumni Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570760038
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
Location
Charleston, SC, USA
Phone
8439535773
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alumni Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$916,393
Expenses
$917,765
Assets
$653,752
Liabilities
$91,972

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

Leadership & pay

35 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAURIE MINGES (PRESIDENT; EXEC COM.)
  • BRADY QUIRK-GARVIN (PRESIDENT-ELECT; EXEC COM.)
  • ELIZABETH L COLBERT-BUSCH (PAST PRESIDENT; EXEC COM.)
  • JAMES W MOON IV (VICE PRESIDENT; EXEC COM.)
  • REBECCA C PORTER (VICE PRESIDENT; EXEC COM.)
  • OTIS ROBINSON (VICE PRESIDENT; EXEC COM.)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIANNA M SABACINSKI (EXECUTIVE SECRETARY (END OCT 2025)): $73,814 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The association works to build a culture of pride and engagement by ensuring alumni from the college of charleston stay informed, get involved, and give back.

What it reported doing in 2024

Alumni clubs and affinity groups: currently the college of charleston alumni association has more than 30 regional clubs throughout the united states. These clubs provide a tangible connection between the alumni in different geographical areas with the college of charleston. Alumni affinity groups based on cultural and professional backgrounds provide opportunities for alumni to enjoy fellowship, to network with each other, to learn how to effectively mentor students, and to volunteer to be student mentors. The alumni clubs and affinity groups provide leadership opportunities and training for alumni involved in the management of the clubs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 61% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.3%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 70.7%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.23 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.1%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.4%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.3% of revenue deployed · 70.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 34 of 34 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $648K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $74K · 35 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.