Islands Community Advocacy Network
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 394187033
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Johns Island, SC, USA
- Phone
- 4046208001
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $59,100
- Expenses
- $12,840
- Assets
- $46,260
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN REOCK (PRESIDENT & FOUNDER)
People named in this filing
- JOSEPH BAUER (BOARD MEMBER)
- CHARLES SEPTER (BOARD MEMBER)
- RAY HOOVER (BOARD MEMBER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the islands community advocacy network is to improve the lives of those in need on johns and wadmalaw islands by connecting needs with resources and ideas with action.
What it reported doing in 2025
Educational programming and scholarshipswe support workshops for parents and youth, mentoring initiatives, and scholarship opportunities. Program content emphasizes safety, resilience, academic readiness, and leadership skills.health and well-beingin collaboration with health partners, ican promotes awareness of public health and mental-health resources, facilitates screenings/clinics hosted by partners, and provides navigation support to connect families to care.faith-based collaborationwe partner with faith communities (e.g., community and faith-based organizations with aligned missions) to support mission-consistent activities and outreach. All funded and sponsored activities are secular in use of funds and inclusive.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 100
- Sustainability: 83
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 78.3%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.6; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.