Alma College

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381359083
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Alma, Michigan, USA
Phone
(989) 463-7111
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Undergraduate College (4-year)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$84,772,473
Expenses
$90,190,628
Assets
$273,426,151
Liabilities
$75,742,925

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

Leadership & pay

36 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dr Jeffrey Abernathy (President)
  • Robert Murray (Vice President for Advancement)
  • James Carman (Vice President of Finance)
  • Damon Brown (Vice President of Student Affairs)
  • Melinda Booth (Vice President for Communication and Marketing)
  • Sarah Dehring (Vice President/Director of Athletics)

Highest reported compensation

  • Dr Jeffrey Abernathy (President): $499,409 total reported compensation
  • Timothy Pinnow (Chief Operating Officer): $269,938 total reported compensation
  • Robert Murray (Vice President for Advancement): $220,179 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To prepare graduates who think critically, serve generously, lead purposefully, and live responsibly as stewards of the world they bequeath to future generations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scholarships and awards to students offset the cost of tuition. Instruction provided to students by highly qualified faculty and assistants. Housing and food service provided to students. Alma College is a residential liberals arts college with approximately 95% of students living and eating on campus.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 88% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.
  • 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.9%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 90.5%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.4%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.03; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 98.9% of revenue deployed · 90.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $81.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $499K · 36 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $13.9M reported
  • Consistency: 45 of 46 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.