Tucker W Hipps Memorial Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 352602818
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Piedmont, SC, USA
- Phone
- 8646050028
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $91,870
- Expenses
- $55,407
- Assets
- $441,808
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CYNTHIA TUCKER-HIPPS (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- SALLY FOISTER (DIRECTOR)
- DOUG BRUNE (DIRECTOR)
- DONNIE TUCKER (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of tucker w. Hipps memorial foundation is to support other non-profit corporations, "helping people help others". Organizations such as palmetto boys state and public universities receive scholarships in tucker hipps' name to offset college expenses. Other activities support education and awareness concerning hazing on intermediate and secondary campuses and helping organizations that help homeless and underprivileged people.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 54
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 82
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 43.3%; rating input score 43
- Program expense ratio: 71.8%; rating input score 72
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 39.7%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.97; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 43.3% of revenue deployed · 71.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $40K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.