Aaniiih Nakoda College (Fort Belknap College)

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN: 810420980
IRS 990 coverage: 2015–2021
Forms available: Form 990 2021
Location: Harlem, MT, USA
Phone: 4063532607
Rating: 89
Verdict: STRONG
Rating confidence: Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue: $9,573,649
Expenses: $9,730,295
Assets: $20,746,896
Liabilities: $10,137,191

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

SEAN CHANDLER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

SEAN CHANDLER (PRESIDENT): $142,800 total reported compensation
DEBRA EVE (EX-OFFICIO TREASURER): $65,380 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of aaniiih nakoda college is to provide quality post-secondary education for residents of the fort belknap indian reservation and surrounding communities. The college promotes individual and community development by maintaining and revitalizing the indigenous lifeways of the aaniinen and nakoda tribes and by preparing students to succeed in an american technological society.

What it reported doing in 2021

Educational services - aaniiih nakoda college is a public educational institution. We have one of two tribal college radio stations in Montana and we utilize the radio station to inform the community of college events and interviews with staff and students. We are proud that all of our courses incorporate indigenous lifeways of the aaniiih and nakoda people in the curriculum. Grants and scholarships to students - we have many opportunities for our students to receive financial assistance while attending aaniiih nakoda college. Not only are there the basic programs such as pell, seog, and college work-study, but we have other federal programs that offer stipends for students while attending school or intern programs.student services related to the educational activities - we have a student services department but all staff are here for the students.

Operating model

Revenue model: Grant-funded. 87% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model: Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

Financial Efficiency: 89
Transparency & Controls: 94
Accountability: 91
Sustainability: 39
Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Pay-setting controls: Limited
Foreign activity oversight: Limited
Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 71st 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

Operating margin: -1.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.13; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.49; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Officer compensation ratio: 2.1%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $9.7M in reported program spending
Leadership: top reported pay $143K · 8 people listed
Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $119K reported
Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
Filing history: 7 filing years from 2015 to 2021
Contacts: How to reach this organization
Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.