Mccormick County Housing for Aginginc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237377946
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Mccormick, SC, USA
Phone
3363751552
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$750,267
Expenses
$688,585
Assets
$1,452,723
Liabilities
$510,553

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • OSCAR NEW (PRESIDENT)
  • KASANDRA M HARPER (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • OSCAR NEW (PRESIDENT)
  • KASANDRA M HARPER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PATRICIA LEVERETTE (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mccormick county housing for the aging, inc., a South Carolina not-for-profit corporation, was incorporated on april 1, 1974, and is a tax exempt organization under section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code. The corporation was formed to construct, own, and operate apartment communities pursuant to sections 515(b) and 521(a) of the national housing act, as amended. The corporation operates cherry valley (a 24 unit complex), cherry manor (a 20 unit complex) and westowne (a 40 unit complex), all located in mccormick, South Carolina. Mortgage loans are provided by rural development, department of agriculture, under section 515(b) and 521(a) of the national housing act. In addition, the corporation has entered into housing assistance payment contracts (hap) with the department of housing and urban development.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 82% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 88.5%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 8.2%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.11; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.3% of revenue deployed · 88.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $610K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.