Lowcountry Veterans Home

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843041715
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Charleston, SC, USA
Phone
8437469404
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$485,383
Expenses
$409,551
Assets
$656,025
Liabilities
$378,505

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Leslie Jackson (Executive Director)
  • Courtney Williams (Executive Director)
  • Kristina O'Neill (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Courtney Williams (Executive Director): $100,000 total reported compensation
  • Leslie Jackson (Executive Director): $4,346 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Lowcountry Veterans Home provides transitional housing and individualized support for homeless veterans, working to restore stability, dignity, and independence. Through case management, peer support, transportation, and strong community partnerships, we help veterans transition from homelessness to long-term, sustainable housing.

What it reported doing in 2025

Costs/Expenses associated with providing safe transitional housing and comprehensive supportive services to homeless U.S. military veterans, including meals, transportation, case management, employment assistance, healthcare coordination, and housing stabilization services that help veterans regain independence and transition to permanent housing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.7%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 62.4%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.6%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.7% of revenue deployed · 62.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $255K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.