Greater Charleston Restaurant Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
900854755
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Charleston, SC, USA
Phone
8438538000
Rating
46
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$650
Expenses
$8,261
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVE KISH (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • SAM MUSTAFA (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL SABOE (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN KEENER (PRESIDENT)
  • BILL HALL (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • AL SIMMONS (PAST PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SUZANNE WALLACE (REPRESENTATIVE)
  • STEVE KISH (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • SAM MUSTAFA (VICE PRESIDENT)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To be the advocate of the local restaurant community, and provide solid benefits to enhance the business and prosperity of association members.

What it reported doing in 2019

Organization ceased operations

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

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: 90
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 0

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; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,170.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.5% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 29 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2013 to 2019
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.