Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of South Carolina
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 570248455
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Columbia, SC, USA
- Phone
- 8037319460
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,979,249
- Expenses
- $1,988,714
- Assets
- $2,170,141
- Liabilities
- $185,785
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- G Frank Sheppard (President-retired)
- Rebecca H McCormack (President CEO - elect)
Highest reported compensation
- G Frank Sheppard (President-retired): $140,061 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The fundamental purpose and objective of the filing organization is to promote educate and represent the common business interests of independent insurance agents of SC within the industry public and legislature. Activities sponsored by the organization are intended to educate members and keep them informed on current topics relative to the industry.
What it reported doing in 2024
Publications include monthly newsletters to membership about insurance industry practices benefits and services the Association provides along with various local national legislative updates. Monthly newsletters = 1125 emails per issue 24 issues. Quarterly magazines provide the membership focused on feature articles relative to the insurance industry along with local national legislative updates. Quarterly magazines = 2245 magazines mailed per 4 issues; 1866 emails sent per 4 issues. Legislative updates during legislative sessions = 1 issue 1125 emails. A Market Guide Publication is provided annually = 200 distributed. Other communications to membership: 7 emails related to benefits and services 6926 recipients; 28 emails related to events 50115 recipients; 23 emails related to education. 28262 recipients; 2 emails related to industry 2984 recipients; 1 email related to other items 1226 recipients.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 81% 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
SUPPORTED - 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: 30
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 33.6%; rating input score 34
- Program expense ratio: 33.5%; rating input score 33
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th 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: Scored; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.5%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 33.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 33.6% of revenue deployed · 33.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $665K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $140K · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 31 of 45 current checks pass · 14 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and related organizations
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 33/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense 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 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 Insurance 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: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.