Richland County Recreation Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 300217851
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Columbia, SC, USA
- Phone
- 8038650138
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $130,998
- Expenses
- $145,438
- Assets
- $115,663
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Thomas Clark (President)
People named in this filing
- Thomas Clark (President)
- Will Stevens (Treasurer)
- Audrey Adams (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Richland County Recreation Commission, South Carolina was established under the laws of the State of South Carolina by Act #873 in 1960 for establishing physical education and recreation facilities for the citizens of Richland County, South Carolina.The Richland County Recreation Foundation was formed by the Richland County Recreation Commission, South Carolina in 2003 for the purpose of promoting recreation programs and activities in the Richland County Recreation District. Since its inception, expenses have been incurred with its organization and initial operations of fund raising development.
What it reported doing in 2024
Expenses used to support various community and other related organizations in recreation programs and activities in the Richland County Recreation District.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 93
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.5%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -11%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 96.5% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $126K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.