Save Our Saluda
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 061839120
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2018
- Location
- Marietta, SC, USA
- Phone
- 8642707629
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $200,079
- Expenses
- $239,323
- Assets
- $33,657
- Liabilities
- $571
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Melanie Ruhlman (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Melanie Ruhlman (President): $61,170 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To protect and restore the upper saluda watershed through education, community awareness, advocacy, and seeking solutions to threats to the saluda river and its tributaries
What it reported doing in 2024
The goal of Save Our Saluda? s 319 project is to reduce sediment runoff in the Upper Saluda Watershed through implementation of agricultural and rural Best Management Practices (BMPs). During 2024, Save Our Saluda provided financial assistance for implementation of BMPS at multiple eligible sites in the watershed. The Middle Saluda River project involved 350 feet of streambank stabilization, 200 feet of which was funded through the Upper Saluda 319 program and partner match. Structural stabilization and streambank protection included grading, installation of boulder toe rock and multiple in-stream rock vane structures to deflect erosive flows away from the streambank. Streambank bioengineering BMPs included seeding, coir matting, and installation of native live stakes and herbaceous plugs along streambank slopes. Approximately 72,000 ft2 of riparian buffer was restored and enhanced along 1,800 feet of river frontage with 470 native trees and shrubs planted during volunteer workdays. Two rock-lined waterways were strategically located and installed through an existing levee berm to provide a hydrologic connection between the river and the floodplain during high flows.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 87% 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 - 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: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 66
- Sustainability: 15
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 97.5%; rating input score 98
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd 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: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -19.6%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 25.6%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $233K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $61K · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.