Defend the Fatherless Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
842625009
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Fort Mill, SC, USA
Phone
7044974050
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$982,894
Expenses
$879,192
Assets
$1,012,512
Liabilities
$6,308

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Caitlin Sund (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Caitlin Sund (Executive Director): $163,412 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 be one more reason for families to say, "Yes" to vulnerable children through foster care, adoption, and kinship care. Defend the Fatherless meets this mission by serving the physical, emotional, educational, spiritual and financial needs of the local foster and adoptive community.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025 Defend the Fatherless had 543 visits to the Foster Closet and subsequently served 1,072 children. During a visit to the Foster Closet, families are able to "shop" at no cost for items including: diapers, wipes, clothing, shoes, socks, underwear, car seats, baby equipment and other essentials. Among other items, we have provided families with cribs, bassinets, bunk beds, twin beds, mattresses, swings, changing tables, exersaucers, strollers, double strollers, infant car seats, toddler car seats, swings, jumperoos, baby carriers, shoes, new socks, new underwear, diapers, wipes, clothes, winter coats, backpacks, school supplies, hats/gloves, bikes and blankets/sheets. Items are donated through the community and are not paid for by Defend. The items are then given away to families at no cost. The Beds for Kids In Care program (a sub program of the foster closet) experienced tremendous growth in 2025. It has been widely used by social workers in hopes of keeping sibling sets together or even in Family Preservation in effort to provide a safe and comfortable place for children to sleep while a biological parent is working with DSS. A total of 396 beds were provided.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 72% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 71
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.4%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 91.3%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.6%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.15; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 39.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 34.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.9% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.4% of revenue deployed · 91.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $802K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.