The Helping Hands of Clemson Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
570722226
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Clemson, SC, USA
Phone
8646546154
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Group Homes

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,002,752
Expenses
$1,905,879
Assets
$4,334,405
Liabilities
$74,476

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIGITTE STEPHENS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JOHN ROSS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • WINSTON HOLTEN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRIGITTE STEPHENS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $67,553 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Helping hands of clemsons mission is to provide a safe and nurturing environment, shelter and bedding, and the essential necessities for the survival of abused and neglected children.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 1978, helping hands of clemson was established by president jean tulli and cofounder, elaine chisman. Six years later in august of 1984, the shelter first opened to receive children. At that time, the shelter was licensed to hold a capacity of 16 children. Now, the organization has grown to house an average of 40-45 children. Most of the children come from anderson, oconee, and pickens counties, but we are also licensed to serve children from abbeville, edgefield, greenville, greenwood, laurens, mccormick, newberry, and saluda counties. All of the children that are placed in the shelter are referred by the department of social services. In some cases, they have been neglected, while in other cases, they have been sexually, physically, and/or emotionally abused. In mild cases of abuse and neglect, the children are allowed to return to their own homes. Our goal is to reunite as many families as possible.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 89.8%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.8%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.27; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 89.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $68K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.