Liberty County Extension 4-H
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 582559937
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Hinesville, GA, USA
- Phone
- 9128762133
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $53,155
- Expenses
- $49,954
- Assets
- $19,516
- Liabilities
- $357
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
1 person listed
People named in this filing
- Erin Hendricks (CEC 4H Agent)
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 organization's primary exempt purpose is to organize and administer 4H, Agriculture, and Natural Resources, and Family and Consumer Sciences programs in Liberty County, Georgia.
What it reported doing in 2025
The Organization provides over one hundred 4H'ers with the opportunity to attend 4H summer educational camping at Rock Eagle 4H Center, Jekyll Island 4H Center, Burton 4H Center, Wahsega 4H Center, and Fortson 4H Center. The organization also gives the opportunity for all students to compete in a public speaking contest that gives the students real life experience and helps them gain confidence as well.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 72% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83.3%; rating input score 83
- Program expense ratio: 88.7%; rating input score 89
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: 6%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 83.3% of revenue deployed · 88.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $44K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.