Saluda Senior Center Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 581960047
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Saluda, NC, USA
- Phone
- 9066300869
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Senior Centers
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $59,044
- Expenses
- $65,194
- Assets
- $237,438
- Liabilities
- $458
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
People named in this filing
- Margaret Boone (Chair)
- Brandy Newman (Vice Chair)
- Nancy Miller (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
The purpose of this corporation is to operate a charitable community center to promote the physical and mental well-being of senior citizens who reside in the Saluda area; to provide meals, activities and fellowship for Saluda area senior citizens on a regular basis.
What it reported doing in 2025
The community center hosted 24 community meals last year, serving around 150 people each time. Qigong is attended by approx. 15 people twice a week and new exercise classes were started with grant funding for yoga, chair yoga, cardio drumming and dance with 12- 15 people attending each class (approx.) Cost of the exercise program is 2250 so far this year, but most of the activities are put on by volunteers who use the building. Maintaining the building and grounds, paying utilities was around 63,000 dollars last year. Savings was used to pave the parking lot at a cost of 17,000 dollars.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 73% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 4
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 3.8%; rating input score 4
- Program expense ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 3
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -10.4%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.64; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 3.8% of revenue deployed · 3.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 4/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.