Tea Ladies of the St James Goose Creek Parish Area

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371576189
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2018–2021
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Goose Creek, SC, USA
Phone
8439911057
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$90
Expenses
$2,079
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sharon Arnold (President)
  • Elizabeth Brown (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Sharon Arnold (President)
  • Elizabeth Brown (Vice President)
  • Mary Steffens (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of The Tea Ladies of the St. James Goose Creek Area is to promote and advance the history, culture, and beautification of the St. James Goose Creek Area and to welcome anyone interested in our mission.

What it reported doing in 2021

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, we were unable to hold our annual tea fundraiser. However, we had funds on hand, including current year dues, to fund The Trident Technical College Scholarship Fund in the amount of $1,908.58. This was the balance we had on hand when our organization was disbanded.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 8.2%; rating input score 8

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2,210%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -60.4% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -52% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -57.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 8.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $171 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2018 to 2021
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.