South Carolina Governors School for Science & Mathematics Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570881347
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Columbia, SC, USA
Phone
8032529152
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Secondary, High School

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,128,070
Expenses
$1,439,008
Assets
$17,546,943
Liabilities
$98,854

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

Leadership & pay

40 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL M SHETTERLY (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • PATRICK J CLEARY (PRESIDENT)
  • ROYCE SHANNON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ELIZABETH DINNDORF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELIZABETH DINNDORF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $177,025 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The foundation supports the sc school for science & mathematics (gssm) by giving voice to its needs, providing supplemental funds to augment its programs, and informing the public of its accomplishments and contributions to the quality of life and economic prosperity of South Carolina.

What it reported doing in 2024

Student research & unique classroom opportunities: gssm students will be able to engage in authentic research projects to test growth parameters (e.g., light, nutrients, ph, etc.), microbial diversity, automation, growth tower engineering, and methods to reduce pathogen loads among many potential projects. Above-ap botany can investigate the impacts of varying day/night cycles, nutrient sources, and ph on plant growth and development on a timeline that is more conducive to academic schedules than traditional agricultural methods. This system would be a hands-on teaching tool for observing plant growth and managing macro- and micro-nutrient balances. Students could also compare soil-grown plants to those grown hydroponically. Ap environmental science can use the hydroponics system as a model to study water-use, nutrient-use, and water quality. Direct interaction with the hydroponics system could motivate student investigations of the potential of hydroponics systems to reduce food transportation distances, tradeoffs in sustainability between agricultural methods, and the potential for urban hydroponic farms to bring food closer to high-density populations.ating the economics of hydroponics.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.3%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 82.4%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.4%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.19; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.3% of revenue deployed · 82.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 36 of 36 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $177K · 40 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.