Navy League of the United States - Charleston Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570728705
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2016
Location
N Charleston, SC, USA
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,933
Expenses
$38,107
Assets
$131,067

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jim Offutt (President)
  • NickWong (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Jim Offutt (President)
  • NickWong (Vice President)
  • Michael McAllister (Treasurer)

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

Provide support to Naval services - Navy Marines Coast Guard and Merchant Marine. Support youth maritime education programs. Contribute to military MWR programs. Provide networking and recognition opportunities. Educate community members on issues faced by sea services.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization conducted an annual USN recognition dinner in the Greater Charleston area honoring active duty and reserve service members from the Navy. The event recognized outstanding service strengthened connections between the military and local maritime community and promoted awareness of national defense and maritime missions. Approximately 400 service members and community participants attended

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.4%; rating input score 93

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -194.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.44; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $36K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.