South Carolina Humanities Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570804684
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Columbia, SC, USA
Phone
8037712477
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts Council/Agency

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,435,498
Expenses
$1,083,008
Assets
$1,842,752
Liabilities
$143,204

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • RANDY L AKERS (EX DIR THRU): $135,918 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 mission of South Carolina humanities council, inc. Is to enrich the cultural and intellectual lives of south carolinians. The organization seeks to increase public understanding of and support for the humanities by telling the human story by awarding grants for high-quality public programs, by generating special humanities initiatives, and by bringing humanities perspectives to bear on contemporary issues.

What it reported doing in 2024

During fy 2025, sc humanities increased public understanding of the humanities by funding, promoting, and coordinating various exhibits, documentaries, discussion forums, research, planning, workshops, dramatizations, lectures, and events that pertain to the humanities. Specifically, 34 grants totaling 176,595 were awarded. Through the speakers bureau program, 32 of the state's finest scholars gave 95 presentations to nonprofits and public agencies around South Carolina, sharing their knowledge and interest in the humanities. In addition, sc humanities continued the tour of the traveling smithsonian exhibit "spark places of innovation," which traveled to 3 communities between november 2024 and march 2025, reaching 6,155 people. We also sponsored our annual South Carolina humanities festival in lancaster and the annual South Carolina awards in the humanities, honoring 6 incredible humanists. We launched the "revolutionary perspectives speakers series" to highlight the crucial, yet often-overlooked roles south carolinians played in the american revolution. Together, these activities reached 36 counties, highlighted the importance of humanities and culture in South Carolina, and brought people together in conversation and celebration.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 69% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.4%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 67.6%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 24.6%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.7; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.6%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.4% of revenue deployed · 67.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $732K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $136K · 26 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.