Dillon County Long Term Recove

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
833588620
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Latta, SC, USA
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$228,130
Expenses
$94,362
Assets
$777,290
Liabilities
$590,000

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KENNETH SMITH (CHAIRMAN)
  • RICHARD SCHAFE (CO CHAIRMAN)
  • KEVIN COOPER (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide disaster relief and education to communities and to help return citizens back to safe and secure and sanitary homes.

What it reported doing in 2020

Rebuilding of community homes after natural disasters.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 43
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.8%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 76.8%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 6.9%; rating input score 7; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 58.6%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.24; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.76; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -61.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 174.2% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.8% of revenue deployed · 76.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $72K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2019 to 2020
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 7/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.