The Lens Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
852708790
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Mt Pleasant, SC, USA
Phone
9737382888
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$548,979
Expenses
$467,796
Assets
$520,115
Liabilities
$3,056

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ALLISON HILTON (DIRECTOR)
  • BRUCE CAULK (DIRECTOR)
  • CAROLINE REYNOLDS (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the lens foundation is to provide law enforcement with support to strengthen community relations and improve public safety in charleston.

What it reported doing in 2024

Police recognition- the lens foundation supports the officers and staff and their families of the charleston police department by sponsoring morale-boosting initiatives that show the community's appreciation for all that they do. Multiple projects were accomplished in 2024, including the police awards recognition banquet which is an annual event, and the creation of the police recognition wall to honor cpd officers killed in the line of duty. Public safety- the lens foundation provides community awareness opportunities and financial support for the mounted patrol, k9 officers, and bike patrol services of the charleston police department.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.5%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 76%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.8%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.11; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 46.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 39.3% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 42% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.5% of revenue deployed · 76% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $356K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.