Edisto Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Legal name: Edisto Electric Cooperative Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 570158355
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Bamberg, SC, United States
- Phone
- 1-800-433-3292
- Rating
- 47
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Utilities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $69,615,546
- Expenses
- $69,615,546
- Assets
- $253,987,794
- Liabilities
- $209,213,185
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DAVID E FELKEL (PRESIDENT &)
Highest reported compensation
- DAVID E FELKEL (PRESIDENT &): $531,544 total reported compensation
- LAWRENCE C SMOAK III (VP OF OPERAT): $284,485 total reported compensation
- ROBERT D BESSINGER (VP OF FINANC): $283,313 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 provide the best possible electric service to all who desire it within the system area at a reasonable cost consistent with the highest standards of service. Edisto Electric Cooperative, Inc., your Touchstone Energy® Partner, is a member-owned rural electric cooperative headquartered in Bamberg, South Carolina. Founded in 1939, the co-op provides service to residential, commercial and industrial consumers in Allendale, Bamberg, Barnwell, Berkeley, Colleton, Dorchester, Hampton and Orangeburg Counties. We give the power to light homes and brighten the streets; to warm long winter nights and cool hot summer days; to open retail doors and turn the cogs of commerce. If you are one of the thousands with whom we serve and touch your life every day, take a look at how you can get more from your cooperative membership. Although our members receive electr.
What it reported doing in 2025
To provide the best possible electric service to all who desire it within the system area at a reasonable cost consistent with the highest standards of service.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.65; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.82; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $532K · 16 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $5.6M reported
- Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.