Helping Hands of Goose Creek Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570891298
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Goose Creek, SC, USA
Phone
8435537132
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$218,501
Expenses
$201,891
Assets
$403,160
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Niccole Franklin (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Niccole Franklin (Executive Director): $40,000 total reported compensation
  • Rodney Wise (Warehouse Manager): $26,960 total reported compensation
  • Mary Van Scoy (Intake Manager): $23,840 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Helping Hands is a crisis food pantry providing groceries and resources to Lowcountry families facing food insecurity.

What it reported doing in 2025

Helping Hands offers a Choice Pantry Program to all families coming for assistance. In 2025, we distributed 6077 carts of groceries to 1646 unique families with a combined weight of 402,000 lbs. We spent $146,193 on this program, with combined soft (overhead) and hard costs of groceries purchased. Our revenue is a combination of food and funds: we received FMV of $20,368 lbs of food and $86,332 in restricted/fundraised dollars.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 23
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.7%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 72.4%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.6%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -41.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -68.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.7% of revenue deployed · 72.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $146K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.