ACSI Capital Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201311949
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Colorado Springs, CO, USA
Phone
7195286906
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$54,772
Expenses
$90,152
Assets
$2,047,304
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Stephen Reel (Interim CEO (Part Year))
  • Larry Taylor (CEO & Part Year Board Member)

Highest reported compensation

  • Stephen Reel (Interim CEO (Part Year)): $198,904 total reported compensation
  • Kevin Buelke (Controller): $122,651 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide access to tax exempt financing through the Colorado Educational and Cultural Facilities Authority (CECFA).

What it reported doing in 2018

The ACSI Capital Corporation is a Colorado non-profit corporation which provides ACSI member schools and colleges in the United States with substantially reduced interest and issuance costs for long-term debt. The organization does this by providing a variety of financial advisory services so that its member schools might access tax exempt bond financing made available through CECFA. The organization conducts an initial screening and reviews the financial statements of the applicants to determine they are a qualified candidate. Additionally, the organization provides advice regarding structuring the financing and offers ongoing information/support regarding debt ratios and communications with CECFA. Since inception, member schools and colleges have borrowed over $470,000,000 through this program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 83% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 20

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: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -64.6%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 22.71; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 50.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.5% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $90K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $199K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.