Greenville Country Club

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570173330
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Greenville, SC, USA
Phone
8642364245
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$23,034,510
Expenses
$20,573,452
Assets
$49,376,695
Liabilities
$30,912,003

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Howard Einstein (Past President)
  • Jeff Powell (Vice President)
  • Michael Fletcher (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Gary Lanneau (General Manager COO Start 3 1 24): $449,049 total reported compensation
  • Craig Harris (Director of Agronomy): $209,504 total reported compensation
  • Robb Thompson (Director of Tennis): $202,447 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

With a rich southern heritage the greenville country club will provide members their families and guests with exceptional athletic social dining and recreational services and facilities managed by an expert and well-trained staff in a manner consistent with sound fiscal principles.

What it reported doing in 2025

The greenville country club provided members their families and guests with exceptional athletic social dining and recreational services and facilities managed by an expert and well-trained staff in a manner consistent with sound fiscal principles.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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: 76
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 53
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.7%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.4; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.63; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.1%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $449K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $298K reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 44 current checks pass · 19 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX DepreciationDepletion column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLegal column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesOther column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Interest column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherEmployeeBenefits column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PensionPlanContributions column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.