Liberty Fellowship of South Carolina
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 922679075
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
- Location
- Spartanburg, SC, USA
- Phone
- 8645299402
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Leadership Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $682,048
- Expenses
- $1,463,346
- Assets
- $1,164,715
- Liabilities
- $39,713
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANN MARIE STIERITZ (FORMER CEO)
- TYCELY WILLIAMS (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ANN MARIE STIERITZ (FORMER CEO): $139,939 total reported compensation
- TYCELY WILLIAMS (CEO): $116,348 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 organization is a network of values-based leaders committed to the betterment of life and opportunity for all citizens of South Carolina. Through a rigorous, 18-month seminar series, a cohort of approximately 20 established leaders become liberty fellows every two years.
What it reported doing in 2024
The multi class gathering program is an opportunity for liberty fellows to convene and discuss current issues in the state, reconnect with their liberty fellowship class, and collaborate across the network. In the current fiscal year, the organization celebrated its 20th anniversary at a 3 day event in greenville where it hosted fellows, stakeholders, and friends of the organization for keynote addresses, panel discussions, and moderated seminar sessions in addition to offering wellness and service opportunities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 83% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 20
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 80.5%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $3.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -114.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.5%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 41.6% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -40% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -50.7% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $140K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.