South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364506347
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
2166965560
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,598,980
Expenses
$6,621,583
Assets
$7,961,243
Liabilities
$524,533

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Karriem Edwards (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Melissa Rogers (Assistant Treasurer): $407,205 total reported compensation
  • Donna Waites (Trustee): $251,345 total reported compensation
  • Karriem Edwards (President): $211,620 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 provide the means for fathers to become great dads, the South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families (Center) works with community-based fatherhood programs across the state of South Carolina providing ongoing leadership, coordination, technical assistance, training, evaluation, and assistance with resource development.

What it reported doing in 2024

The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families (Center) was established in 2002 as a ministry of the Sisters of Charity Health System (SCHS). The Fatherhood initiative of the Sisters of Charity Foundation of South Carolina (Foundation) led to the establishment of six fatherhood organizations. The Center, through a partnership with the Foundation and the South Carolina Department of Social Services, provides financial support for these programs. The community-based programs provide services to low-income fathers around responsible fatherhood, job readiness and employment, parenting and co-parenting, healthy relationships, and additional services on a case-by-case basis. To date, the Center has served more than 25,000 fathers and families and has impacted the lives of more than 56,000 children.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 82% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 89.7%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $83.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.1%; rating input score 98; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.3%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.8% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93% of revenue deployed · 89.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $407K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 22 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.