Society of American Military Engineers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570746898
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
N Charleston, SC, USA
Phone
5182566034
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$102,124
Expenses
$49,096
Assets
$404,931
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Rachel Honderd (President)
  • Christina Jettie (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Jennilee Covucci (Treasurer)
  • Rachel Honderd (President)
  • Melanie Bodiford (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Society of American Military Engineers Charleston Post is part of a national nonprofit organization focused on engineering and national security. Its mission is to lead collaboration in support of national security priorities by advancing three key goals: building partnerships delivering solutions and developing people.

What it reported doing in 2025

2,500 Warrior surf gala sponsorship 300 Palmetto Military sponsorship 200 Midlands post Golf tournament sponsorship 500 Hurricane Helene relief 423 CEJC sponsorship 120 Facilithon reimbursement

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 62% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 45% for direct work, and 55% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.5%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 51.9%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.25; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $49K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.